Evaluation of Olfactory Function With Objective Tests in COVID-19-Positive Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

Gözen, Emine Deniz; Aliyeva, Chinara; Tevetoğlu, Fırat; Karaali, Rıdvan; Balkan, İ̇lker İnanç; Yener, Murat; Ozdogan, H.

doi:10.1177/0145561320975510

Cited by 33 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…OD was evaluated through psychophysical testing in 21 studies. The Sniffin’Sticks’ test was the most commonly employed objective test (n=8 studies) 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 46 , 60 , 61 . Through pen-like odor dispensing devices, it assesses three olfactory functions, i.e.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review

Boscutti

Delvecchio

Pigoni

et al. 2021

Brain, Behavior, & Immunity - Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Among Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, Olfactory (OD) and Gustatory (GD) Dysfunctions (OGD) have drawn considerable attention, becoming a sort of hallmark of the disease. Many have speculated on the pathogenesis and clinical characteristics of these disturbances; however, no definite answers have been produced on the topic. With this systematic review, we aimed to collect all the available evidence regarding the prevalence of OGD, the timing of their onset and their resolution, their rate of recovery and their role as diagnostic and prognostic tools for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Methods A systematic review comprising all the observational studies that reported the prevalence and/or the longitudinal trajectories of OGD in COVID-19 patients, as self-reported by patients or measured through objective psychophysical tests. Results After the selection process, 155 studies were included, with a total of 70920 patients and 105291 not-infected individuals. Prevalence reports were extremely variable across studies, with wide ranges for OD (0% - 98%) and GD (0-89%) prevalence. OGD occurred early during the disease course and only rarely preceded other symptoms; out of 30 studies with a follow-up time of at least 20 days, only in 5 studies OGD fully resolved in more than 90% of patients. OGD had low sensitivity and high specificity for SARS-CoV-2 infection; accuracy of OD and GD for infection identification was higher than 80% in 10 out of 33 studies and in 8 out of 22 studies considered, respectively. 28 out of 30 studies that studied the association between OGD and disease severity found how OGD were associated with lower rates of severe pneumonia, hospitalization and mortality. Conclusions OGD seem to be highly prevalent in SARS-CoV-2 infection. They occur early, concomitantly with other symptoms and often persist after recovery, in some cases for months; whether a full recovery eventually occurs in all cases is not clear yet. OGD are good predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with a milder disease course.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Aggregated prevalence (presence of either OD or GD) was given in 56 studies (36%), with a large inter-study variability (range: 1.5% 80 – 91% 58 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review

Boscutti

Delvecchio

Pigoni

et al. 2021

Brain, Behavior, & Immunity - Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, no psychophysical evaluation of smell and taste was conducted. Recent studies [ 40 ] indicate that an olfactory disorder in COVID-19 patients is much more prevalent than those detected by questionnaires and use of objective methods are useful tools to discriminate between these patients. That would imply that the self-reported OGD of more than 20% in our SARS-CoV-2 negative tested individuals are severely underestimated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presence of gustatory and olfactory dysfunction in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The unexpected outbreak of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused more than 49 million cases and an estimated 2,000,000 associated deaths worldwide. In Germany, there are currently more than 2,000,000 laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases including 51,800 deaths. However, regional differences also became apparent and with the second wave of infections, the detailed characterization of COVID-19 patients is crucial to early diagnosis and disruption of chains of infections. Methods Handing out detailed questionnaires to all individuals tested for COVID-19, we evaluated the clinical characteristics of negative and positive tested individuals. Expression of symptoms, symptom duration and association between predictor variables (i.e. age, gender) and a binary outcome (olfactory and gustatory dysfunction) were assessed. Results Overall, the most common symptoms among individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were fatigue, headache, and cough. Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction were also reported by many SARS-CoV-2 negative individuals, more than 20% of SARS-CoV-2 negative tested individuals in our study reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunction. Independent of SARS-CoV-2 status, more females displayed symptoms of gustatory (29.8%, p = 0.0041) and olfactory dysfunction (22.9%, p = 0.0174) compared to men. Conclusions Bringing early SARS-CoV-2 tests to the populations at risk must be a main focus for the upcoming months. The reliability of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction in COVID-19 negative tested individuals requires deeper investigation in the future.

show abstract

“…Altogether, our findings support the idea that SCENTinel 1.0 represents a rapid, accurate, flexible, and cost-effective tool to deploy a smell test on large scale population surveillance efforts. The development of SCENTinel 1.0 has been spurred by the new sudden loss of smell that characterizes COVID-19, including among nominally asymptomatic individuals, many of whom had smell loss but were not aware of before receiving an objective olfactory test (Gözen et al, 2020;Bhattacharjee et al, 2020) . Yet, the large-scale availability of a validated rapid smell test can benefit not only health emergencies such as COVID-19, but also be used in early detection and monitoring of a variety of clinical conditions, including psychiatric, neurological and neurodegenerative disorders.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SCENTinel 1.0: development of a rapid test to screen for smell loss

Parma

Hannum

O’Leary

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCommercially available smell tests are primarily used in research or in-depth clinical evaluations, but are too costly and lengthy for population surveillance in health emergencies like COVID-19. We developed the SCENTinel 1.0 test which rapidly evaluates three olfactory functions (detection, intensity, and identification). We tested whether self-administering the SCENTinel 1.0 test discriminates between individuals with smell loss or average smell ability (normosmics), and provides comparable performance as the validated and standardized NIH Toolbox® Odor Identification Test in normosmics.MethodsUsing Bayesian linear models and prognostic classification algorithms, we compared the SCENTinel 1.0 performance of a group of self-reported anosmics (N=111, 47±13yo, F=71%,) and normosmics (N=154, 47±14yo, F=74%), as well as individuals reporting other smell disorders (e.g., hyposmia, parosmia; N=42, 55±10yo, F=67%).ResultsNinety-four percent of normosmics met our SCENTinel 1.0 accuracy criteria, while only 10% of anosmics and 64% of individuals with other smell disorders did. Overall performance on SCENTinel 1.0 predicted belonging to the normosmic group better than identification or detection alone (vs. anosmic: AUC=0.95, Sensitivity=0.72, Specificity=0.94). Odor intensity provided the best single-feature predictor to classify normosmics. Among normosmics, 92% met the accuracy criteria at both SCENTinel 1.0 and the NIH Toolbox® Odor Identification Test.ConclusionsSCENTinel 1.0 is a practical test able to discriminate individuals with smell loss and is likely to be useful in many clinical situations, including COVID-19 symptom screening.

show abstract

Evaluation of Olfactory Function With Objective Tests in COVID-19-Positive Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

Cited by 33 publications

References 20 publications

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review

Presence of gustatory and olfactory dysfunction in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic

SCENTinel 1.0: development of a rapid test to screen for smell loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About