PurposeTo provide up-to-date and detailed normative data based on a large-scale sample, increasing diagnostic validity by reference to narrow age groups as previous normative values were based upon smaller sample sizes—especially in the group of older subjects.MethodData were obtained from 9139 healthy subjects (4928 females aged 5–96 years and 4211 males aged 5–91 years). The standard “Sniffin’ Sticks” test was applied, comprising threshold (T), discrimination (D) and identification (I) subtests, and yielding a TDI sum score.ResultsHyposmia was established at a TDI score of less than 30.75. Age-related changes were found in each domain, most pronounced for thresholds. Individuals aged 20–30 years performed best, whereas children below the age of 10 and adults above the age of 71 scored only half as well. Sex-related differences were in favor of women.ConclusionsData provide guidance for assessing individual olfactory performance in relation to specific age groups. Significant gender and age effects were observed, with a most pronounced increase of olfactory test scores between age 5 through 20 years and a dramatic decrease at the age of 60 through 71 years.
We show that there is a statistically significant relation between measured and perceived improvement of olfactory function in patients who first presented with the diagnosis of anosmia or hyposmia. The results indicate that improved olfactory function in patients with olfactory deficiency is perceived as such in everyday life and is quantitatively related to an improvement in the composite TDI score of the "Sniffin' Sticks" olfactory test battery. This is the basis for the application of a specific therapy for olfactory loss because of a possible gain in quality of life for the patients.
Objectives/Hypothesis: Postinfectious olfactory loss is among the most common causes of olfactory impairment and has substantial negative impact on patients' quality of life. Recovery rates have been shown to spontaneously improve in most of patients, usually within 2 to 3 years. However, existing studies are limited by small sample sizes and short follow-up. We aimed to assess the prognostic factors for recovery in a large sample of 791 patients with postinfectious olfactory disorders.Study Design: Retrospective cohort.Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 791 patients with postinfectious olfactory loss. Olfactory functions were assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks test at the first and final visits (mean follow-up 5 1.94 years).Results: Smell test scores improved over time. In particular, patient's age and the odor threshold (T), odor discrimination (D), and odor identification (I) (TDI) score at first visit were significant predictors of the extent of change. The percentage of anosmic and hyposmic patients exhibiting clinically significant improvement was 46% and 35%, respectively.Conclusions: This study provides new evidence within the postinfectious olfactory loss literature, shedding light on the prognostic factors and showing that recovery of olfactory function is very frequent, even many years after the infection.
Background/objectives: Loss of olfactory function is largely found with aging. Such a reduction in olfactory function affects quality of life and enhances likelihood of depressive symptoms. Furthermore, it has been shown that reduction in olfactory function is associated with cognitive impairment and several diseases such as major depression. Because several studies suggest that discontinuous exposure to odors may improve general olfactory function, the primary aim of this study was to investigate whether such "olfactory training" has positive effects on subjective well-being and cognitive function. Design: We performed a controlled, unblinded, longitudinal study Setting: The study took place at an outpatients' clinic of a Department of Otorhinolaryngology at a Medical University. Participants: A total of 91 participants (age 50 to 84 years) completed testing. They were randomly assigned to an olfactory training (OT) group (N = 60) and a control group (N = 31). The study included two appointments at the Smell and Taste Clinic. Measurements: Olfactory and cognitive function as well as subjective well-being was tested using standardized tests. Intervention: During the 5-month interval between sessions, the OT group completed daily olfactory exposure. During the same time, the control group completed daily Sudoku problems. Results: Analyses show a significant improvement of olfactory function for participants in the OT group and improved verbal function and subjective well-being. In addition, results indicated a decrease of depressive symptoms. Conclusion: Based on the present results, OT may constitute an inexpensive, simple way to improve quality of life in older people.
The currently presented large dataset (n = 1,422) consists of results that have been assembled over the last 8 years at science fairs using the 16-item odor identification part of the “Sniffin’ Sticks”. In this context, the focus was on olfactory function in children; in addition before testing, we asked participants to rate their olfactory abilities and the patency of the nasal airways. We reinvestigated some simple questions, e.g., differences in olfactory odor identification abilities in relation to age, sex, self-ratings of olfactory function and nasal patency. Three major results evolved: first, consistent with previously published reports, we found that identification scores of the youngest and the oldest participants were lower than the scores obtained by people aged 20–60. Second, we observed an age-related increase in the olfactory abilities of children. Moreover, the self-assessed olfactory abilities were related to actual performance in the smell test, but only in adults, and self-assessed nasal patency was not related to the “Sniffin’ Sticks” identification score.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.