Self-reported Olfactory Function Research Articles

Parosmia Is Positively Associated With Problematic Drinking, as Is Phantosmia With Depressive Symptoms.

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a global health problem with significant negative consequences, including preventable deaths. Although olfactory dysfunction is associated with chronic alcohol drinking, the relationship among specific types of olfactory deficits, depressive symptoms, and problematic drinking remains to be explored. Here, we examined the prevalence of olfactory distortion (parosmia) and hallucination (phantosmia) and assessed their associations with problematic drinking and depressive symptoms. In April-June 2022, 250 participants across the spectrum of AUD were recruited for assessment in the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Alcohol study. Surveys covered self-reported olfactory function, depressive symptoms, and problematic drinking, with key measures assessed, including the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Patient Health Questionnaire. Predictors in the analysis included parosmia and phantosmia, with covariates comprising age, sex, socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, COVID-19 infection status, and smoking status. Among 250 individuals, 5.2% experienced parosmia and 4.4% reported phantosmia. Parosmia was associated with higher Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test scores (β = 7.14; 95% confidence interval = 3.31, 10.96; P < 0.001), whereas phantosmia was linked to higher Patient Health Questionnaire scores (β = 3.32; 95% confidence interval = 0.22, 6.42; P = 0.03). These associations persisted in both the full sample and the subset of participants without COVID-19. Our study highlights strong existing links among olfactory deficits, problem drinking, and depressive symptoms, underscoring the need to assess smell impairments in clinical settings. Future research should explore these connections further to develop new treatments for individuals with AUD and depression.

One-year psychophysical evaluation of COVID-19-induced olfactory disorders: a prospective cohort study

BackgroundOlfactory disorders are common in COVID-19. While many patients recover within weeks, a notable number of patients suffer from prolonged olfactory disorders. Much research has focused on the acute phase of olfactory disorders in COVID-19; however, there is still inconsistency regarding the prognosis. We aim to assess both objective and subjective olfactory function in patients with persisting olfactory disorders following COVID-19, 1 year after diagnosis.MethodsWe objectively measured olfactory function in 77 patients who initially had COVID-19-induced smell disorders, 1 year after confirmed diagnosis. These patients previously underwent two objective measurements at approximately 3 and 6 months after COVID-19, in the context of the COCOS trial (COrticosteroids for COvid-19-induced loss of Smell). The main outcome measurement was TDI score (threshold-discrimination-identification) on Sniffin’ Sticks Test (SST). Secondary outcomes included objective gustatory function on Taste Strip Test (TST), self-reported olfactory, gustatory and trigeminal function on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and outcomes on questionnaires about quality of life, and nasal symptoms.ResultsThe findings of this study show that 1 year following COVID-19, the median TDI score increased to 30.75 (IQR 27.38–33.5), regarded as normosmia. The median TDI score started at 21.25 (IQR 18.25–24.75) at baseline and increased to 27.5 (IQR 23.63–30.0) at 6 months following COVID-19. The increase of 9.5 points on the TDI score between baseline and 1 year after COVID-19 marks a clinically relevant improvement. Regarding the self-reported VAS score (1–10) on sense of smell, it increased from 1.2 (IQR 0.4–3.0) at baseline to 3.2 (IQR 1.4–6.0) at 6 months and further improved up to 6.1 (IQR 2.7–7.5) after 1 year. Objective gustatory function increased with 2 points on TST a year after diagnosis. Self-reported olfactory, gustatory, and trigeminal functions also improved over time, as did quality of life.ConclusionsObjective and self-reported olfactory function continued to improve 1 year after COVID-19. The median TDI score of 30.75 (IQR 27.38–33.5) is regarded as normosmia, which is a favorable outcome. However, the rate of improvement on TDI score reduces over time.

Proof-of-concept: SCENTinel 1.1 rapidly discriminates COVID-19-related olfactory disorders.

It is estimated that 20%-67% of those with COVID-19 develop olfactory disorders, depending on the SARS-CoV-2 variant. However, there is an absence of quick, population-wide olfactory tests to screen for olfactory disorders. The purpose of this study was to provide a proof-of-concept that SCENTinel 1.1, a rapid, inexpensive, population-wide olfactory test, can discriminate between anosmia (total smell loss), hyposmia (reduced sense of smell), parosmia (distorted odor perception), and phantosmia (odor sensation without a source). Participants were mailed a SCENTinel 1.1 test, which measures odor detection, intensity, identification, and pleasantness, using one of 4 possible odors. Those who completed the test (N = 287) were divided into groups based on their self-reported olfactory function: quantitative olfactory disorder only (anosmia or hyposmia, N = 135), qualitative olfactory disorder only (parosmia and/or phantosmia; N = 86), and normosmia (normal sense of smell; N = 66). SCENTinel 1.1 accurately discriminates quantitative olfactory disorders, qualitative olfactory disorders, and normosmia groups. When olfactory disorders were assessed individually, SCENTinel 1.1 discriminates between hyposmia, parosmia, and anosmia. Participants with parosmia rated common odors less pleasant than those without parosmia. We provide proof-of-concept that SCENTinel 1.1, a rapid smell test, can discriminate quantitative and qualitative olfactory disorders, and is the only direct test to rapidly discriminate parosmia.

COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction, evaluation of onset, and persistence.

Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common feature of COVID-19. The goal of the study was to define the modes of onset of OD in the clinical course of the disease and to follow the cases for 12-18 months in order to estimate the differences in the recovery time from OD over the course of the disease. We managed to follow a total of 325 patients (females: 198, males: 127) in the Babylon governorate in Iraq. All were COVID-19 patients who should have OD during the course of the disease. COVID-19 infection was established in all patients by swab test, i.e. polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and/or chest computed tomography findings of pneumonia compatible with COVID-19. Detailed medical records were obtained directly from the patients or their relatives. The patients were then followed up by telephone and questioned with structured questionnaires concentrating upon general clinical features and the sense of olfaction. Information about the presence of olfactory disorders, their occurrence, and development was recorded. Based on the onset of OD, the patients were categorized into three groups. Olfactory functions were assessed primarily by face-to-face interview and then (if necessary) by a telephone questionnaire assessing self-reported olfactory function and olfactory-related quality of life, which measures the subjective olfactory capability (SOC). In the first 2 weeks, 148 (45.5%) patients reported complete recovery from OD, of which 90 (73.2%) patients joined at the end of the 1st month. OD persistence was observed in 11 (3.3%) patients toward the end of the 1st year, in 5 (1.5%) patients at the end of the 15th month, and only in two (0.6%) patients at the end of the 18th month. We found no significant correlation between the type of onset of OD and the duration and persistence of OD. Most sufferers of COVID-associated OD recover their sense of smell within the 1st month.

Olfactory and neurological outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 from acute infection to recovery

To investigate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on sinonasal quality of life, olfaction, and cognition at different stages of viral infection and evaluate the association between olfaction and cognition in this population cohort. While olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a frequently reported symptom of COVID-19 (98% prevalence), neurocognitive symptoms are becoming more apparent as patients recover from infection. This study aims to address how different stages of infection [active infection (positive PCR test, symptomatic) vs. recovered (7 days post-symptoms)] compared to healthy control patients influence sinonasal quality of life, olfactory function, and cognition. Prospective, longitudinal, case-control. Participants completed the SNOT-22, University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and validated cognitive examinations to assess degree of smell loss and neurocognitive function at baseline and at 1 and 3 months for the active group and 3 months for the recovered group. Self-reported olfactory function and overall health metrics were also collected. The recovered group had the lowest average UPSIT score of 27.6 compared to 32.7 (active) and 32.6 (healthy control). 80% (n = 24) of the recovered patients and 56.3% (n = 9) of the active patients suffered from smell loss. In follow-up, the active group showed improvement in UPSIT scores while the recovered group scores worsened. In terms of neurocognitive performance, recovered patients had lower processing speed despite an improving UPSIT score. SARS-CoV-2 infection was found to impact olfactory function in a delayed fashion with significant impact despite recovery from active infection. Although olfactory function improved, decrements in cognitive processing speed were detected in our cohort.

Human odor exploration behavior is influenced by olfactory function and interest in the sense of smell

Olfaction plays an important role in social interaction. This study examined the influence of chemosensory and cognitive abilities on conscious odor sniffing behaviors in humans. Participants (N = 349) were surveyed using a questionnaire for the frequency of behaviors in terms of odor exploration from intrinsic and external sources. Chemosensory functions (e.g., odor identification, trigeminal sensitivity, taste functions, and nasal patency), self-reported olfactory function, and the subjective importance of olfaction were assessed. Hierarchical regression analyses demonstrate a strong impact of olfactory importance on odor exploration behavior. Both female gender and chemosensory function (odor identification ability and trigeminal sensitivity) had a positive impact on odor exploration behavior from individuals' own body and from external sources. Moreover, participants with dysosmia compared to those with normosmia showed less frequent odor exploration behaviors, while their behaviors were partly predicted by nasal patency. In conclusion, conscious olfactory exploration behaviors reflect the interest in the sense of smell and is strongly modulated by chemosensory function. In turn, individuals with lower olfactory sensitivity invest less in olfactory explorations.

Measured and self-reported olfactory function in voluntary Norwegian adults

PurposeThe lack of epidemiological data on the proportion of olfactory dysfunction (OD) using comprehensive olfactory assessment in healthy adults in Scandinavia motivated to the present study which aimed to explore the proportion of OD in voluntary healthy Norwegian adults, assessed by Sniffin’ Sticks, and its correlation to self-reported olfactory function. Furthermore, sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with olfactory function were analysed.MethodsThe sample included 405 Norwegian participants, aged 18–78 years, 273 women and 132 men, who underwent olfactory testing with extensive Sniffin’ Sticks test, allergy testing, clinical examination with nasal endoscopy and completed a self-administered questionnaire, including self-evaluation of olfactory function on a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale.ResultsWe found that 37% had OD, of which 1.2% had anosmia assessed with extensive Sniffin’ Sticks test. The proportion of hyposmia and anosmia increased with age. Men and participants with low education had poorer olfactory function scores. Allergy, smoking status, general health and endoscopic findings were not associated with measured olfactory function. We found no correlation between self-reported and measured olfactory function.ConclusionsThis study has identified that a large proportion of our sample of voluntary healthy Norwegian adults have OD, considerably more common in older adults and somewhat more common in men and individuals with low education. The lack of correlation between self-reported and measured olfactory function highlights the importance of using validated tests for a reliable olfactory evaluation.

The Scent of Monogamy: Self-Reported Olfactory Function Predicts Sexual Well-Being and Infidelity in an Italian Population.

Previous studies have shown that olfactory function plays an essential role in the bonding of a romantic relationship. Body odors, in particular, seem involved in both mate choices and other intimate behaviors. Our sense of smell is also crucial to detect possible pathogen threats, by activating a suitable disgust reaction. Previous studies have shown that disgust sensitivity is negatively related to sociosexuality, and disgust generally inhibits our sexual drive. In the present study, we explored the possible relation between olfactory function, pathogen disgust sensitivity, sociosexuality, sexual well-being, and infidelity through a web survey. Our exploratory analyses found that, in a large Italian sample (N = 1107), among those in a stable relationship, self-reported olfactory function predicted sexual well-being (p < .05) and negatively predicted infidelity (p < .05) when controlling for other relevant sociodemographics variables. Moreover, the relation between self-reported olfactory function and sexual well-being was mediated by pathogen disgust sensitivity. Although significant, these results must be interpreted with caution, because the effect sizes were small.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10508-021-02109-2.

Self-reported olfactory function according to the severity of COVID-19

Background: Establishing a relationship between COVID-19 severity and olfactory dysfunction may be beneficial in patient follow-up. Thus, in this study, we aimed to evaluate the association between self-reported olfactory dysfunction and the clinical stages of COVID-19.&#x0D; Methods: The patients included in this study were divided into three groups according to the severity of the novel coronavirus disease as mild, severe, and critical (life-threatening) patients. Patients were then contacted by phone and asked questions with the help of structured questionnaires that evaluated their general status, sense of smell, taste and compared the data within the three groups.&#x0D; Results: Among the 144 subjects evaluated in the present study (mild, n = 60; moderate, n = 61, severe, n = 23), 70 of the participants were males, and 74 were females. The findings showed that olfactory loss was the most prominent feature of the COVID-19's mild clinical course and the majority of the patients with loss of smell were female and young patients.&#x0D; Conclusion: The findings obtained from clinically mild cases suggest that more olfactory dysfunction, indicating that the effects of viral load alone, is not decisive for olfactory dysfunction.

The temporal course of COVID-19 anosmia and relation to other clinical symptoms.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to define the clinical course of anosmia in relation to other clinical symptoms. Methods135 patients with COVID-19 were reached by phone and subsequently included in the study. Olfactory functions were evaluated using a questionnaire for assessment of self-reported olfactory function. Patients were divided into four subgroups according to the presence of olfactory symptoms and temporal relationship with the other symptoms: group1 had only olfactory complaints (isolated, sudden-onset loss of smell); group2 had sudden-onset loss of smell, followed by COVID-19 related complaints; group3 initially had COVID-19 related complaints, then gradually developed olfactory complaints; and group4 had no olfactory complaints.ResultsIn total, 59.3% of the patients interviewed had olfactory complaints during the disease course. The olfactory dysfunction severity during COVID-19 infection was significantly higher in group1 compared to groups 2 and 3. In groups1–3, the odor scores after recovery from COVID-19 disease were significantly lower compared to the status prior to disease onset. The residual olfactory dysfunction was similar between groups1 and 2, but was more evident than group3. Mean duration for loss of smell was 7.8 ± 3.1 (2–15) days. Duration of loss of smell was longer in groups1 and 2 than in group3. Odor scores completely returned back to the pre-disease values in 41 (51.2%) patients with olfactory dysfunction. Rate of complete olfactory dysfunction recovery was higher in group3 compared to groups1 and 2.ConclusionIn isolated anosmia cases, anosmia is more severe, and complete recovery rates are lower compared to the patients who have other clinical symptoms.Level of evidenceLevel 4.

Development of a Korean Culture-Friendly Olfactory Function Test and Optimization of a Diagnostic Cutoff Value

ObjectivesCultural familiarity and safety must be considered when assessing olfactory ability. The YSK olfactory function (YOF) test is a new olfactory function test using culturally familiar odorants to Koreans.MethodsThe YOF test comprises three subtests for threshold (T), discrimination (D), and identification (I). The identification test included eight universal and four Korean culture-friendly odorants, which were selected considering eight major functional groups. Data were obtained from 1,127 subjects over 19 years old. Subjects were classified as having normosmia (n=542), hyposmia (n=472), and anosmia (n=113) by self-reported olfactory function. The YOF test and the Korean version of the Sniffin’ stick test (KVSS-II) were performed on the same day in random order. Diagnostic cutoffs for anosmia and hyposmia were calculated using the Youden index (J).ResultsThe mean values for each T/D/I subtest and the total TDI score were as follows: normosmia (T, 4.6±2.3; D, 8.6±2.1; I, 11.1±1.7; TDI score, 24.2±4.5); hyposmia (T, 3.3±2.2; D, 7.1±2.5; I, 9.2±3.1; TDI score, 19.5±6.4); and anosmia (T, 1.7±1.2; D, 5.1±2.5; I, 5.0±3.2; TDI score, 11.8±5.6). The correlation coefficients between the YOF test and KVSS-II were 0.57, 0.65, 0.80, and 0.86 for T, D, I, and the TDI score, respectively (P<0.001). The diagnostic cutoffs were a TDI score ≤14.5 (J=0.67) for anosmia and 14.5(TDI score ≤21.0 (J=0.38) for hyposmia. The diagnostic efficacy of the YOF test (area under the curve [AUC], 0.88) was equivalent to that of the KVSS-II (AUC, 0.88; P=0.843; DeLong method).ConclusionThe YOF test is a new olfactory test using safe and Korean culture-friendly odorants. It showed equivalent validity with the conventional olfactory function test. Furthermore, the YOF test provides information on the major functional groups of odorants, potentially enabling a more comprehensive interpretation for patients with olfactory disorders.

Subjective Olfactory Loss in Older Adults Concurs with Long-Term Odor Identification Decline.

Olfactory impairments may provide early indications of future health outcomes in older adults. Thus, an important question concerns whether these impairments can be self-assessed. Previous findings of cross-sectional studies indicate low correlations between self-reported olfactory function and objective olfactory performance. On the other hand, subjective olfactory impairments predict future dementia and mortality in longitudinal settings. No previous study has assessed the relationship between subjectively and objectively measured decline in olfaction over time. Based on data for 903 older adults derived from the Betula Study, a Swedish population-based prospective study, we tested whether rate-of-change in odor identification could be predicted from subjective olfactory decline over a time span of 10 years during which subjective and objective odor functions were assessed on 2 or 3 test occasions. Indeed, we found that participants who experienced subjective olfactory decline over the study period also had significantly steeper rates of decline in odor identification, even after adjusting for demographic, cognitive, and genetic factors that previously have been associated with performance in odor identification. This association was, however, not present in a subsample with baseline cognitive impairment. We interpret these results as evidence that when asked about whether they have an olfactory impairment or not, older persons are assessing intraindividual olfactory changes, rather than interindividual differences. Our results indicate that subjective olfactory loss reflects objective olfactory decline in cognitively intact older adults. This association might be harnessed to predict health outcomes and highlights the need to develop effective olfactory self-assessments.

Smell Loss Predicts Mortality Risk Regardless of Dementia Conversion.

To determine whether dementia could explain the association between poor olfactory performance and mortality risk within a decade-long follow-up period. Prospective cohort study. Betula Study, Umeå, Sweden. A population-based sample of adult participants without dementia at baseline aged 40 to 90 (N = 1,774). Olfactory performance using the Scandinavian Odor-Identification Test (SOIT) and self-reported olfactory function; several social, cognitive, and medical risk factors at baseline; and incident dementia during the following decade. Within the 10-year follow-up, 411 of 1,774 (23.2%) participants had died. In a Cox model, the association between higher SOIT score and lower mortality was significant (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.74 per point interval, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.71-0.77, P < .001). The effect was attenuated, but remained significant, after controlling for age, sex, education, and health-related and cognitive variables (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.87-0.97, P = .001). The association between SOIT score and mortality was retained after controlling for dementia conversion before death (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.87-0.97, P = .001). Similar results were obtained for self-reported olfactory dysfunction. Poor odor identification and poor self-reported olfactory function are associated with greater likelihood of future mortality. Dementia does not attenuate the association between olfactory loss and mortality, suggesting that olfactory loss might mark deteriorating health, irrespective of dementia.

Factors Associated with Inaccurate Self-Reporting of Olfactory Dysfunction in Older US Adults.

Self-reported olfactory function has poor sensitivity (i.e., people with measured olfactory dysfunction are unlikely to accurately report it). We aimed to identify factors associated with lack of awareness of smell dysfunction. Objective odor identification was evaluated using a validated 5-item test in respondents from the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project, a representative sample of home-dwelling, US adults ages 57-85 (n = 1468). Self-reported olfaction was assessed with a 5-point Likert scale. Using multivariate logistic regression, we tested factors that might influence inaccuracy of self-reported olfaction, including age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, marital status, cognition, comorbidity, smoking, depression, anxiety, self-rated mental and physical health, and social activity. Among older US adults, 12.4% reported their sense of smell as fair or poor, while 22.0% had objective olfactory dysfunction (≤3 items correct out of 5). Among those with measured olfactory dysfunction, 74.2% did not recognize it; these individuals were more likely to be older, Black, never married, and to have worse cognitive function compared to individuals who recognized their dysfunction (P < 0.05, all). Individuals who lacked awareness of their olfactory dysfunction had the greatest cognitive impairment at 5-year follow-up, followed by individuals aware of their dysfunction and finally normosmics (P < 0.001). Older Americans with measured olfactory dysfunction are unlikely to report it, and those who lack awareness of this dysfunction have distinct demographic, social, and cognitive characteristics. Therefore, clinicians should objectively test patients. Individuals who lack awareness of their olfactory dysfunction have poor cognitive outcomes and should receive additional clinical scrutiny.

Olfactory dysfunction in chronic stroke patients.

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to investigate odor identification performance in patients one year after hospital admittance due to stroke. Predictors for olfactory dysfunction were investigated as well as self-reported olfactory function and pleasantness of olfactory items.MethodsA 1-year prospective study was performed. Stroke location, classification and comorbidities were registered at hospital admission. One year after admission, olfactory function was assessed using standardized olfactory methods (screening for loss of detection sensitivity and an odor identification test). A group of matched controls was derived from a population-based study to compare odor identification performance between groups. Patients were asked for their personal judgment regarding their olfactory function and pleasantness of odorous items. In addition, global cognitive function and symptoms of depression were assessed.ResultsA total of 78 patients were enrolled (46 males, 32 females; mean age 68 years) of which 28.2 % exhibited reduced olfactory function (hyposmia) and 15.4 % exhibited loss of olfactory function (10.3 % functional anosmia, 5.1 % complete anosmia). Patients showed significantly lower olfactory performance compared to age- and sex-mated matched controls. Predictors of impaired olfactory function were age and NIHSS score. Self-reports indicated no significant differences between patients with normal olfactory function and those with reduced function. Yet, patients having an olfactory dysfunction rated odorous items as significantly less pleasant compared to patients without dysfunction.ConclusionsOlfactory dysfunction seems to occur frequently after stoke even one year after initial admission. The deficits seem to relate to hyposmia and functional anosmia, and less to a complete loss of smell sensitivity.

Does it Matter How We Pose the Question "How is Your Sense of Smell?"

There is a rather large, and unfortunate, discrepancy in the outcome between self-reported and standardized assessment of olfactory function. Questions for self-evaluation are commonly used that provide no information of with what to compare (comparison target) one’s olfactory function. We therefore investigated whether responses differed between an unspecific question and two questions providing comparison targets. Ninety-six healthy community-dwelling individuals (62.5 % women) aged 49–80 years evaluated their odor identification ability, followed by standardized assessment of odor identification ability. Results revealed that response patterns varied significantly depending on comparison target. While 81 % reported normal function when no further comparison target was presented, 69 % reported normal function when referring to age-related olfactory changes in identification ability. In turn, sensitivity of the accuracy of self-reported reduced odor identification ability (with standardized assessment as reference) increased from 11 to 37 %, whereas specificity decreased from 86 to 71 % when providing a comparison target. Accuracy of self-reported olfactory function can be increased by including a comparison target. However, standardized assessment is to be preferred over self-reported assessment, irrespective of how the question is formulated.

Sensitivity and Specificity of Self-Reported Olfactory Function in a Home-Based Study of Independent-Living, Healthy Older Women.

The 2011-14 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey chemosensory protocol asks adults to self-rate their orthonasal (via nostrils) and retronasal (via mouth) smell abilities for subsequent odor identification testing. From data collected with a similar protocol, we aimed to identify a self-reported olfactory index that showed the best sensitivity (correctly identifying dysfunction) and specificity (correctly indentifying normosmia) with measured olfaction. In home-based testing, 121 independent-living older women (age 73±7 years) reported their olfactory function by interviewer-administered survey. Olfactory function was measured orthonasally via composite (odor threshold, identification task) or identification task alone. Only 16 % of women self-rated "below average" smell function. More women perceived loss of smell (38 %) or flavor (30 %) with aging. The rate of measured dysfunction was 30 % by composite (threshold and identification) and 21.5 % by identification task, the latter misclassifying some mild dysfunction as normosmia. An index of self-rated smell function and perceived loss yielded the most favorable sensitivity (65 %) and specificity (77 %) to measured function. Self-rated olfaction showed better agreement with severe measured dysfunction; mild dysfunction was less noticed. Self-reported indices that query about current and perceived changes in smell and flavor with aging showed better sensitivity estimates than those previously reported. Specificity was somewhat lower-some older adults may correctly perceive loss unidentified in a single assessment, or have a retronasal impairment that was undetected by an orthonasal measure. Our findings should inform self-rated measures that screen for severe olfactory dysfunction in clinical/community settings where testing is not routine.

Candidate odours for a short form odorant identification test

Measurement of olfactory function is difficult and despite the availability of validated olfactory tests these are not in common use in general clinical practice. The mismatch between self-reported olfactory function and objective test response is well known, thus the need for adequate assessment of olfaction is not disputed. We aimed to determine which if any odour in a commercially available olfactory test could be identified by 70 % or more of normal subjects with a view to developing a shortened screening test for use in general otolaryngology and non-specialist clinics in the United Kingdom. Hospital staff and medical students, under 50 years of age were recruited. The tests were undertaken in a quiet room of neutral odour. Subjects were asked to self-identify 12 odorants presented consecutively and to record how strongly they perceived the odorants on a 4-point scale. One hundred and four participants correctly identified the odorant in 466 (37.3 %) of the 1,248 individual odorant identification tests. Peppermint, fish and coffee odours were identified by 88.5, 79.8 and 69.7 % of participants, respectively, without the advantage of a choice of name prompt. These supra-threshold test odour stimuli were perceived as present in all of the individual odour identification tests, but correct identification of the test odour was very much lower for the other nine test stimuli. Peppermint, fish and coffee are odours that should be evaluated further for inclusion in a short form olfactory identification test in a British population.

カード型嗅覚同定検査「Ｏｐｅｎ Ｅｓｓｅｎｃｅ」の有用性

Since the Odor Stick Identification Test for Japanese (OSIT-J) has proved clinically useful in Japan, the Open Essence (OE) smell identification test card has been developed to amend OSIT-J deficits. To determine its clinical effectiveness, we administered the OE to 93 Japanese subjects reporting olfactory dysfunction. They scored their olfactory dysfunction on levels one to five, i.e., normal to anosmic, using the Japan Rhinologic Society Self-Administered Odor Questionnaire (SAOQ) and the visual analog scale (VAS). They also took the Japanese standard olfactory test (T & T olfactometry) and intravenous olfactometry (Alinamin test). Opinions on the OE and OSIT-J were recorded from those previously administered the OSIT-J and testers familiar with OSIT-J administration. The OE took 5.1+/- 1.6 minutes to administer. Scores correlated significantly for the OE, self-reported olfactory function, SAOQ, VAS, T & T olfactometry recognition threshold, and Alinamin latency and duration time. Subjects and testers reported the OE to be easier, shorter, more interesting, and more convenient, indicating its utility in clinical olfactory dysfunction evaluation and its convenience for both subjects and testers.