1. |
- Gerkin, Richard C., et al.
(author)
-
Recent Smell Loss Is the Best Predictor of COVID-19 Among Individuals With Recent Respiratory Symptoms
- 2021
-
In: Chemical Senses. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0379-864X .- 1464-3553. ; 46
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0–100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n = 4148) or negative (C19−; n = 546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19− groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean ± SD, C19+: −82.5 ± 27.2 points; C19−: −59.8 ± 37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0–10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 < OR < 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
|
|
2. |
- Konstantinidis, Iordanis, et al.
(author)
-
Identification of unpleasant odors is independent of age.
- 2006
-
In: Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0887-6177. ; 21:7, s. 615-621
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The purpose of this study was to investigate (a) the relationship between identification proficiency for specific odors and chronological age and (b) to determine whether the relationships were related to perceived quality (i.e., judgments of familiarity, intensity, and hedonics) of the odor item. Data from 472 subjects (227 men, 245 women) ranging in age from 18-79 years were assessed in a cued identification test comprising 16 odors. The results indicated a reliable age effect in overall odor identification performance. Further analyses indicated that the observed age-related deficit was odorant-specific, with some odors being equally well identified across age cohorts and others showing sensitivity to the process of aging. Additional examination regarding the observed age-differential effects across the different odor types indicated that these may be understood according to the pleasantness/upleasantness associated with the odor. Specifically, odors perceived as unpleasant showed age invariance whereas odors rated as pleasant exhibited age sensitivity.
|
|
3. |
- Parma, Valentina, et al.
(author)
-
More Than Smell—COVID-19 Is Associated With Severe Impairment of Smell, Taste, and Chemesthesis
- 2020
-
In: Chemical Senses. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0379-864X .- 1464-3553. ; 45:7, s. 609-622
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments, such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, and generally lacked quantitative measurements. Here, we report the development, implementation, and initial results of a multilingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in 3 distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, and 8 others, aged 19–79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste, and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change ±100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (−79.7 ± 28.7, mean ± standard deviation), taste (−69.0 ± 32.6), and chemesthetic (−37.3 ± 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and the lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus strain 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms.
|
|
4. |
- Schriever, Valentin A., et al.
(author)
-
Development of an International Odor Identification Test for Children : The Universal Sniff Test
- 2018
-
In: The Journal of Pediatrics. - : Elsevier BV. - 0022-3476 .- 1097-6833. ; 198, s. 265-272
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- ObjectiveTo assess olfactory function in children and to create and validate an odor identification test to diagnose olfactory dysfunction in children, which we called the Universal Sniff (U-Sniff) test.Study designThis is a multicenter study involving 19 countries. The U-Sniff test was developed in 3 phases including 1760 children age 5-7 years. Phase 1: identification of potentially recognizable odors; phase 2: selection of odorants for the odor identification test; and phase 3: evaluation of the test and acquisition of normative data. Test-retest reliability was evaluated in a subgroup of children (n = 27), and the test was validated using children with congenital anosmia (n = 14). Results Twelve odors were familiar to children and, therefore, included in the U-Sniff test. Children scored a mean +/- SD of 9.88 +/- 1.80 points out of 12. Normative data was obtained and reported for each country. The U-Sniff test demonstrated a high test-retest reliability (r(27) = 0.83, P < .001) and enabled discrimination between normosmia and children with congenital anosmia with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 86%.ConclusionsThe U-Sniff is a valid and reliable method of testing olfaction in children and can be used internationally.
|
|