Dietary Supplement Use and Motivations in Competitive vs. Non-Competitive Athletes

Dietary supplements come in various forms, including powders, bars, gummies, liquids, tablets, and capsules and are commonly used by athletes. Motivations for supplement use are varied and may be influenced by sport type and competitive goals. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare supplement usage and reasons for consumption between competitive (C) and non-competitive (NC) strength and power athletes. METHODS: Strength and power athletes were recruited from a local training center to complete an online survey distributed via QR code and online link. Data collected included competition status, supplements consumed, reasons for use, and knowledge of U.S. supplement regulations. Responses were analyzed using chi-square tests to determine significance between groups (p<0.05). RESULTS: 137 of 165 athletes completed the survey and were included in data analysis. 69 athletes reported being in preparation for a competitive event and 68 reported they did not compete. There were no significant differences between C and NC athletes on the most frequently reported supplements consumed, including protein powders (54.3% vs. 64.9%), creatine (43.5% vs. 54.1%), caffeine (37% vs. 37.8%), multivitamins (19.6% vs. 21.6%), fish oils (17.4% vs. 16.2%), and magnesium (17.4% vs. 16.2%), respectively. The most reported reasons for supplement use were not statistically different between groups and included increase/maintain muscle mass (75.4% vs. 82.4%), increase strength/power (75.4% vs. 82.4%), and health maintenance/prevent nutritional deficiencies (53.6% vs. 57.4%), in C and NC athletes, respectively. However, C athletes were more likely to use supplements for recovery compared to NC athletes (71.0% C and 51.5% NC, p=0.02). 38.5% and 31.3% of C and NC, respectively, were unaware the FDA is not authorized to approve dietary supplements for efficacy before they are marketed. CONCLUSION: Findings in this study indicate similar patterns of supplement consumption and reasons for supplementing between C and NC athletes, however C athletes were more likely to report using supplements to promote recovery. Additionally, over one-third of the sample was unaware that the FDA does not have to approve supplements, indicating this population may need targeted education on supplement claims, efficacy, and safety.

Publication Details

Journal
TopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University)
Published
2024-11-06
Primary Topic
Muscle metabolism and nutrition
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dietary Supplement Use and Motivations in Competitive vs. Non-Competitive Athletes

TopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University)
Muscle metabolism and nutrition
article

Dietary Supplement Use and Motivations in Competitive vs. Non-Competitive Athletes

article en

Abstract

Dietary supplements come in various forms, including powders, bars, gummies, liquids, tablets, and capsules and are commonly used by athletes. Motivations for supplement use are varied and may be influenced by sport type and competitive goals. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare supplement usage and reasons for consumption between competitive (C) and non-competitive (NC) strength and power athletes. METHODS: Strength and power athletes were recruited from a local training center to complete an online survey distributed via QR code and online link. Data collected included competition status, supplements consumed, reasons for use, and knowledge of U.S. supplement regulations. Responses were analyzed using chi-square tests to determine significance between groups (p<0.05). RESULTS: 137 of 165 athletes completed the survey and were included in data analysis. 69 athletes reported being in preparation for a competitive event and 68 reported they did not compete. There were no significant differences between C and NC athletes on the most frequently reported supplements consumed, including protein powders (54.3% vs. 64.9%), creatine (43.5% vs. 54.1%), caffeine (37% vs. 37.8%), multivitamins (19.6% vs. 21.6%), fish oils (17.4% vs. 16.2%), and magnesium (17.4% vs. 16.2%), respectively. The most reported reasons for supplement use were not statistically different between groups and included increase/maintain muscle mass (75.4% vs. 82.4%), increase strength/power (75.4% vs. 82.4%), and health maintenance/prevent nutritional deficiencies (53.6% vs. 57.4%), in C and NC athletes, respectively. However, C athletes were more likely to use supplements for recovery compared to NC athletes (71.0% C and 51.5% NC, p=0.02). 38.5% and 31.3% of C and NC, respectively, were unaware the FDA is not authorized to approve dietary supplements for efficacy before they are marketed. CONCLUSION: Findings in this study indicate similar patterns of supplement consumption and reasons for supplementing between C and NC athletes, however C athletes were more likely to report using supplements to promote recovery. Additionally, over one-third of the sample was unaware that the FDA does not have to approve supplements, indicating this population may need targeted education on supplement claims, efficacy, and safety.

TopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
Muscle metabolism and nutrition
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.