Supplements · Metabolic & Cardiometabolic

creatine increases muscle strength and power

In plain terms: Does creatine actually make you stronger and more powerful?

Strong support Supplements

RefutedContestedStrong support

consensus score 0.95

Yes — this is one of the best-established supplement effects there is. Paired with resistance training, creatine reliably adds strength and power across ages and both upper and lower body. The boost is modest but real and well-replicated.

📅 Last reviewed: 2026-07-14 ⓘ

Evidence ladder

How far up the ladder this claim has climbed. A high consensus on a low rung means "consistent so far," not "proven in people."

Top evidence so far: All trials, pooled (Meta-analysis)

MechanismIn-vitroAnimalObservationalRCTMeta-analysis

How the studies fall

13 support 0 contradict 0 tested null 1 mixed · 14 sources, 13 independent groups

What the evidence shows

Robust, consistent meta-analytic support for creatine + resistance training on maximal strength and power; effect sizes are modest but reliable across ages and both upper and lower body.

Cochrane agrees with us see how our grade compares ▾

Cochrane review 2013 · High quality Agrees with our grade

GRADE not explicitly stated; authors describe evidence as 'high quality' for muscular dystrophies, 'high quality but limited' for metabolic myopathies)

“High quality evidence from RCTs shows that short- and medium-term creatine treatment increases muscle strength in muscular dystrophies (mean difference 8.47%; 95% CI 3.55 to 13.38). High quality but limited evidence from RCTs does not show significant improvement in muscle strength in metabolic myopathies.”

Why we agree: we reached the same direction independently, from our own appraisal of 14 sources. Two methods landing in the same place is a stronger signal than either alone.

What is Cochrane, and why trust it?

Cochrane produces systematic reviews: instead of running a new study, they gather every trial ever done on a question, judge how well each was run, and pool the results. They take no commercial or industry funding, which is why the medical community treats their reviews as a gold standard — and why we check our own verdicts against theirs.

About Cochrane ↗ · Get involved / support ↗

Read the Cochrane review ↗

The evidence (14)

Source	Grade	Stance	Quality	Finding
Fernandez-Garrido J et al 2026 · study_type: RCT	RCT	supports	moderate	103 older adults (68±4.6y), 16-week RCT: creatine (3g/day) combined with high-load velocity-intentional resistance training produced additional strength and functional gains vs exercise+placebo; creatine alone also improved perceived health
Lanhers 2017 · Sports Med	meta-analysis	supports	high	Meta-analysis: creatine improved upper-limb strength performance across exercises.
Naddafha S et al 2026 · study_type: meta-analysis	meta-analysis	supports	moderate	7 RCTs (n=608) postmenopausal women: leg-press 1RM improved with creatine, MD +7.5kg (95% CI 2.2-12.8, I2=0%); benefit required creatine ≥5g/day combined with resistance training, not seen at ≤3g/day without RT.
Wang Y et al 2026 · study_type: RCT	RCT	supports	moderate	60 male participants, RCT: 4-day creatine (alone or with carbs/protein) vs placebo increased mean and peak power across repeated Wingate sprints (p<0.01); placebo group showed performance decrements across trials.
Ben Maaoui K et al 2026 · study_type: RCT	RCT	supports	low	11 physically active men, randomized crossover: single-dose creatine ingested before resistance exercise increased bench press and back squat total load lifted vs placebo/control (p=0.035 and p<0.001); no CMJ power difference.
Deng B et al 2025 · study_type: meta-analysis	meta-analysis	supports	moderate	Network meta-analysis, 30 RCTs (n=693 athletes): creatine superior to placebo for peak anaerobic power (SMD=0.62, 95% CI 0.20-1.03, moderate certainty) and mean anaerobic power (SMD=0.74, 95% CI 0.08-1.39, very low certainty); no effect on
Devries 2014 · Med Sci Sports Exerc	meta-analysis	supports	high	Meta-analysis: creatine + resistance training increased strength gains in older adults over training alone.
Kazeminasab 2025 · Nutrients	meta-analysis	supports	high	Meta-analysis: creatine increased both upper- and lower-body maximal strength and muscular power vs placebo.
López-Moreno M et al 2026 · study_type: RCT	RCT	mixed	moderate	20 physically active vegan adults, 4wk creatine monohydrate (0.1g/kg/day) vs placebo: significant gains in lower-body explosive power (CMJ height/flight time, p<0.001-0.04), but no changes in sprint or strength tests (handgrip, isometric mi
Wang Z et al 2026 · study_type: meta-analysis	meta-analysis	supports	high	Network meta-analysis of 35 RCTs (n=1211 trained athletes, min. 6 months structured training): creatine superior to comparators for muscle strength (SMD=0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.63, SUCRA=82.4%).
Branch 2003 · Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab	meta-analysis	supports	moderate	Meta-analysis: creatine improved high-intensity/short-duration performance and strength (small-moderate ES).
Dos Santos MSC et al 2026 · study_type: RCT	RCT	supports	low	67 post-COVID-condition patients, RCT: creatine 6g/day (vs placebo) with exercise produced significant handgrip strength increase (DiD +4.40kgf, 95% CI 0.27-8.52, p=0.037) alongside reduced fatigue.
Kreider 2017 · J Int Soc Sports Nutr	observational	supports	low	ISSN position stand: consistent evidence creatine augments high-intensity strength and power adaptations.
Dos Santos 2021 · Nutrients	meta-analysis	supports	moderate	Meta-analysis: creatine + RT significantly improved muscle strength in older adults.

Disagree, or know a study we missed?

We grade by evidence, not opinions. The way to weigh in is to point us to a study we haven't cited (check the evidence table above first), or to flag a problem with one we have. Every submission is reviewed; if it holds up, the grade updates and shows in Science Changes Its Mind.

📚 Suggest a study ⚑ Flag / request reclassification

Opens a short form. You'll sign in with Google so submissions are tied to a real account — we don't display your identity, and we only accept a link we can verify (PubMed, DOI, ClinicalTrials.gov).

Educational only, not medical advice. Grades and scores reflect published evidence weighted by study design and quality; see the methodology.