Hydrogenology
Source-linked study record

The Effect of 14-Day Consumption of Hydrogen-Rich Water Alleviates Fatigue but Does Not Ameliorate Dyspnea in Long-COVID Patients: A Pilot, Single-Blind, and Randomized, Controlled Trial

Tan Y et al. · Nutrients. 2024;16(10):1529.

HumanH₂-rich waterPublished 2024Source checked
Study record, not medical adviceThis record reports what the source states. It is not medical advice and does not establish that molecular hydrogen is effective, safe or appropriate for any person.
Quick summary

Study at a glance

Evidence type

Human

Population or model

Vaccinated, non-hospitalized adults aged 18–65 with persistent fatigue and dyspnea after COVID-19

Intervention and dose

Freshly prepared hydrogen-rich water, 500 mL in the morning and 500 mL in the evening, consumed within 10 minutes · 1,600 ppb dissolved H₂; pH 7.6, oxidation-reduction potential −590 mV and 22 °C reported.

Duration

14 days

Reported result

Compared with placebo, percent changes favored H₂ water for fatigue (p=0.046), 6-minute walk distance (p<0.001), chair-stand performance (p=0.002) and sleep quality (p=0.012). Dyspnea (p=0.556) and mood scores did not differ significantly.

Main limitation

Small pilot, single blinding, 14-day intervention, home testing with remote administration, multiple outcomes and a secondary percent-change fatigue finding despite a non-significant group-by-time interaction for the primary FSS model.

Evidence and classification

What kind of evidence is this?

Evidence type

Human

Reported design

Pilot single-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial

Research topic

Long COVID

Administration form

H₂-rich water

Information not yet classified

Some editorial classification fields are still pending. The source-reported outcomes and result are shown below; Hydrogenology does not infer a positive or negative signal from prose automatically.

Reported in the source

Methods

Population or model

Vaccinated, non-hospitalized adults aged 18–65 with persistent fatigue and dyspnea after COVID-19

Sample

55 recruited; 32 randomized and completed (16 per group)

Duration

14 days

Intervention

Freshly prepared hydrogen-rich water, 500 mL in the morning and 500 mL in the evening, consumed within 10 minutes

Hydrogen form

H₂ dissolved in water — H₂ only, not Brown’s gas.

Dose or H₂ specification

1,600 ppb dissolved H₂; pH 7.6, oxidation-reduction potential −590 mV and 22 °C reported.

Comparator

Equal amount of pure placebo water in identical packaging

Reported, not endorsed

Outcomes and reported result

Outcomes measured

Fatigue, dyspnea, 6-minute walk, chair stand, sleep quality and mood scales

Reported result

Compared with placebo, percent changes favored H₂ water for fatigue (p=0.046), 6-minute walk distance (p<0.001), chair-stand performance (p=0.002) and sleep quality (p=0.012). Dyspnea (p=0.556) and mood scores did not differ significantly.

Extraction completeness

Methods, full outcome tables, funding and conflict statements checked in the open-access full text; independent risk-of-bias appraisal remains incomplete.

A reported association, difference or mechanism is not automatically a clinical benefit.

Interpretation limits

Limitations and applicability

Main methodological cautions

Small pilot, single blinding, 14-day intervention, home testing with remote administration, multiple outcomes and a secondary percent-change fatigue finding despite a non-significant group-by-time interaction for the primary FSS model.

Applies directly to

Vaccinated, non-hospitalized adults meeting this study’s Long COVID criteria; not hospitalized or medically complex populations.

Preliminary appraisal framework

Cochrane RoB 2 · parallel randomized trial · headline fatigue result

Preliminary risk-of-bias status

High risk — preliminary for the headline fatigue interpretation

Appraisal rationale

Single blinding, staff administering home assessments knew allocation, and the highlighted fatigue finding comes from a secondary percent-change analysis although the primary group-by-time interaction for FSS was not significant.

Appraisal domains

Some concerns — Excel random-number generation is described; allocation concealment is not. · Some concerns — participants were blinded, but assessment staff knew group assignment. · Low concern — all 32 randomized participants completed the study. · High risk for subjective fatigue — remotely administered FSS with assessors aware of allocation. · High risk for the headline fatigue result — emphasis on a secondary percent-change analysis despite a non-significant primary interaction.

No single-study GRADE certainty rating is assigned. Read how records and evidence assessments are prepared.

Sources and status

Sources and record status

Identifiers

PMID: 38794767 · DOI: 10.3390/nu16101529

Publisher access

Open-access publisher and PMC full texts are available.

Extraction basis

Open-access publisher full text, PMC record and PubMed bibliographic record.

Last reviewed

10 August 2026

Help the next reader

Help people check the facts before they buy.

Hydrogenology keeps 665 source-checked records accessible without advertising or product promotion.

Support independent access
Help us correct the recordReport a discrepancy

Send the exact difference between this page and the linked source. The study reference is attached automatically.