Ten tests of olfactory function (including tests of odor identification, detection, discrimination, memory, and suprathreshold odor intensity and pleasantness perception) were administered on two test occasions to 57 subjects ranging in age from 18 to 83 years. The stability of the average test scores was determined across the two test sessions for 14 measures derived from these 10 tests and for subcomponents of the Japanese T&T olfactometer threshold test. In addition, the test-retest reliability (Pearson r) of each test measure was established. With the exception of a response bias measure, the average test scores did not differ significantly across the two test sessions. Statistically, the reliability coefficients of the primary test measures fell into three general classes bound by the following r values: 0.43-0.53; 0.67-0.71; 0.76-0.90. Detection threshold values were more reliable than recognition threshold values; those based upon a single ascending presentation series were much less reliable than those based upon a staircase procedure. The relationship between test length and reliability was examined for several of the tests and mathematically modeled. For example, within the staircase series incorporating the odorant phenyl ethyl alcohol, reliability was related (R2 = 0.984) to the number of reversals included in the threshold estimate by a function derived from the Spearman-Brown formula; namely, reliability = 0.455* # reversals/[1 + 0.455 (# reversals - 1)]. Reversal location, per se, had little influence on reliability. Overall, this study suggests that (i) considerable variation is present in the reliability of olfactory tests, (ii) reliability is a function of test length, and (iii) caution is warranted in comparing results from nominally different olfactory tests in applied settings since the findings may, in some instances, simply reflect the differential reliability of the tests.
Decreased olfactory function commonly occurs in idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD), regardless of stage, treatment, or duration of disease. In the present study, we sought to determine whether different subtypes of PD, categorized according to well-defined clinical criteria, evidence different degrees of olfactory dysfunction. Significantly different scores on the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) were present between patients with benign PD and malignant PD (respective means [SD] = 22.51 [8.50] and 17.38 [6.29]) and between tremor-predominant PD and postural instability-gait disorder (PIGD)-predominant PD (23.43 [8.18] versus 17.35 [6.00]). No statistically significant differences in UPSIT scores were observed between young-onset and older-onset PD patients. Women outperformed men in most subtypes examined.
Olfactory dysfunction occurs in most patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD). In this study, we sought to determine whether such dysfunction is also present in progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), a condition which shares a number of motor symptoms with PD and is commonly misdiagnosed as PD. We administered the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test, a standardized test of odor identification ability, to 21 PSP patients; 17 also received a forced-choice odor detection threshold test. We compared the olfactory test scores to those obtained from PD patients and normal controls matched to the PSP patients on the basis of age, sex, and smoking habits. Overall, the olfactory function of the PSP patients was markedly superior to that of the PD patients and did not differ significantly from that of the normal controls. There was no association in either the PSP or PD patient groups between (1) the olfactory test scores and (2) measures of motor symptom severity, disease stage, and medication usage. These findings demonstrate that patients with PSP and PD differ markedly in their ability to smell and suggest that olfactory testing may be useful in their differential diagnosis.
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.