Languages

Read Hydrogenology in your language

Automatic translation noticeHydrogenology was originally written in English. The name Hydrogenology is a proper name and is never translated. Other language versions are translated automatically with AI and may contain inaccuracies, especially in scientific or medical terminology. When precision matters, consult the English version and the linked original source.

Selecting a language opens an automatic Google translation of the current page. You can also use your browser's built-in translation option; in Chrome, use the Translate icon in the address bar or right-click the page and choose Translate. Google Chrome translation help ↗

Europe

Widely spoken languages

Hydrogenology
Source-linked study record

Effects of High-concentration Hydrogen+Oxygen Gas Inhalation on Lower Limb Hemodynamics, Muscle Flexibility, Joint Range of Motion, and Vertical Jump Height: Study Using a Single-blind Crossover Study

Masaki Tamura; Takuya Aso; Mitsugu Hachisu; Hitomi Kitai; Kanji Furuya; Takeyuki Sanbe; Naoya Nishinaka · Physical Therapy Japan. 2024;51(4):93-100.

HumanInhaled H₂Published 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

Ten healthy men inhaled a hydrogen-oxygen mixture and ambient air on separate visits. Most measurements, including flexibility and jump height, showed no clear difference. One exploratory comparison of change in blood-flow velocity favored the gas mixture; this small study does not demonstrate a physical-performance or clinical benefit.

Evidence type

Human

Population or model

10 healthy adult men; mean age 25.7 ± 2.9 years.

Intervention and dose

One hour of nasal-cannula source mixture from Hycellvator ET100, with participants resting supine or prone. · Source mixture approximately 68% H₂ / 32% O₂. Actual inspired H₂ fraction not reported.

Duration

1 hour per condition; at least 7 days between conditions (mean 8.1, range 7–14 days); outcomes immediately before and after.

Reported result

Main repeated-measures analyses found no significant effects or interactions for vessel diameter, blood-flow velocity, flexibility, joint range or vertical jump. Exploratory after/before peak blood-flow-velocity ratio: 1.14 ± 0.23 with H₂/O₂ versus 0.94 ± 0.14 with air (P = 0.02; reported r = 0.71). Other ratio outcomes were not significant, including vertical jump (P = 0.15). This does not establish exercise recovery or clinical benefit.

Main limitation

Only 10 healthy men and short-term physiological measurements. Single blinding, limited allocation details and unmatched oxygen complicate interpretation. The positive exploratory velocity ratio sits alongside mostly null main analyses. Ratio tests included unpaired/rank-sum methods despite the crossover design. Microvascular flow and recovery after exercise were not directly assessed.

Evidence and classification

What kind of evidence is this?

Evidence type

Human

Reported design

Randomized single-blind two-period crossover experiment, with five participants initially assigned to each sequence.

Original-language title

高濃度水素+酸素ガス吸入が下肢血流動態,筋柔軟性,関節可動域,垂直飛び高に与える影響

Research topic

Exercise and recovery

Administration form

Inhaled H₂

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

10 healthy adult men; mean age 25.7 ± 2.9 years.

Sample

10 randomized and analyzed; 5 initially assigned to each crossover sequence.

Duration

1 hour per condition; at least 7 days between conditions (mean 8.1, range 7–14 days); outcomes immediately before and after.

Intervention

One hour of nasal-cannula source mixture from Hycellvator ET100, with participants resting supine or prone.

Hydrogen form

Hydrogen–oxygen mixture, not pure H₂: approximately 68% H₂ and 32% O₂ at the generator.

Dose or H₂ specification

Source mixture approximately 68% H₂ / 32% O₂. Actual inspired H₂ fraction not reported.

H₂ flow

Gas flow not reported in the checked full text.

O₂ delivered with H₂

Approximately 32% O₂ at the generator; ambient-air comparator not oxygen matched.

Comparator

Ambient air delivered through a nasal cannula; oxygen composition was not matched to the intervention mixture.

Reported, not endorsed

Outcomes and reported result

Outcomes measured

Multiple hemodynamic and physical-function outcomes; no prospectively specified primary-endpoint hierarchy reported.

Reported result

Main repeated-measures analyses found no significant effects or interactions for vessel diameter, blood-flow velocity, flexibility, joint range or vertical jump. Exploratory after/before peak blood-flow-velocity ratio: 1.14 ± 0.23 with H₂/O₂ versus 0.94 ± 0.14 with air (P = 0.02; reported r = 0.71). Other ratio outcomes were not significant, including vertical jump (P = 0.15). This does not establish exercise recovery or clinical benefit.

Extraction completeness

The available main full text was reviewed for methods, results, limitations and declarations. Remaining source-specific uncertainties are stated in this record.

Reported adverse events

No adverse events reported.

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

Interpretation limits

Limitations and applicability

Main methodological cautions

Only 10 healthy men and short-term physiological measurements. Single blinding, limited allocation details and unmatched oxygen complicate interpretation. The positive exploratory velocity ratio sits alongside mostly null main analyses. Ratio tests included unpaired/rank-sum methods despite the crossover design. Microvascular flow and recovery after exercise were not directly assessed.

Applies directly to

10 healthy adult men; mean age 25.7 ± 2.9 years. Findings apply only to the studied design and exposure; no treatment or device recommendation.

Funding and support

Showa University Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences research grant, fiscal year 2021.

Conflicts of interest

HelixJapan supplied the hydrogen–oxygen generator; this support appears in the conflict-of-interest section.

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

Sources and status

Sources and record status

Identifiers

Source ID: doi-10.15063-rigaku.12478 · DOI: 10.15063/rigaku.12478

Publisher access

Complete Japanese-language publisher article on J-STAGE in HTML, including both tables.

Editorial verification

AI-assisted editorial review of the available main full text, 29 October 2026. The source version and access limitations are stated in this record. No independent clinical or statistical assessment has been performed.

Source sections checked

Full publisher HTML: Introduction; Subjects and methods 1–7, including randomization, washout, device composition and statistics; Results; Tables 1-2; Discussion and limitations; Conclusion; Acknowledgements; Conflict of interest/funding statement; references.

Extraction basis

AI-assisted editorial review of the available main full text, 29 October 2026. Complete Japanese-language publisher article on J-STAGE in HTML, including both tables.

Registry / related-source limitations

Trial registration not reported. Showa University ethics approval 22-122-A; written consent reported.

Last reviewed

29 October 2026

Help the next reader

Help people check the facts before they buy.

Hydrogenology keeps 692 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.