Olfactory Training for Postviral Olfactory Dysfunction: Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Kattar, Nrusheel; Triet, M.; Unis, Graham D.; Migneron, Matthew; Thomas, Andrew; McCoul, Edward D.

doi:10.1177/0194599820943550

Cited by 88 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The survey helps to delineate the paucity of effective treatment provision for this particular group of patients with olfactory dysfunction. It is particularly notable that only 3% of survey participants reported undertaking olfactory training as a treatment option, which given the increasing volume of evidence to support this option [17], is surprising. This may well be a product the current knowledge of their physicians who treated them Furthermore, it is interesting that some patients underwent imaging which would not ordinarily indicated if the history is clear and endoscopy shows no evidence of intranasal pathology [1]; this suggests that work is needed to disseminate the guidelines from the 2017 Position Paper on Olfactory Dysfunction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Experiences of Post-Infectious Olfactory Dysfunction

Philpott

Boardman²,

Boak³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionTo highlight the importance of the need for new treatment modalities, this study aimed to characterise the experience of patients with post-infectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) in terms of the treatment they received. MethodsAn online survey was hosted by the Norwich Clinical Trials Unit on the secure Redcap Server. Members of the charity Fifth Sense (the UK charity that represents and supports people affected by smell and taste disorders) were invited to participate. ResultsThere were 149 respondents from which 127 had identified themselves as having (or had) PIOD. The age range of respondents to the survey was 28-85 with a mean of 58 12 years with the duration of their disorder less than 5 years in 63% of cases. Respondents reported experiencing variable treatment with oral and/or intranasal steroids given typically (28%), often with no benefit, but with 50% receiving no treatment whatsoever; only 3% reported undertaking olfactory training. Over two thirds of patients experience parosmia and up to 5 years from the onset of the problem were still actively seeking a solution. ConclusionThere appears to be a need to encourage greater use of guidelines for olfactory disorders amongst medical practitioners and also to develop more effective treatments for patients with PIOD, where there is clearly an unmet need.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Experiences of Post-Infectious Olfactory Dysfunction

Philpott

Boardman²,

Boak³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No effective treatments for non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction are available at the present time except the olfactory training. It should be pointed out that olfactory training has been proven to be a potential treatment modality for olfactory dysfunction resulting from multiple etiologies including postinfectious, post-traumatic, idiopathic, and aging-related olfactory dysfunction (Sorokowska et al, 2017;Birte-Antina et al, 2018;Lamira et al, 2019;Pellegrino et al, 2019;Kattar et al, 2020). This emerging simple and effective protocol has been widely studied in patients with non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction.…”

Section: Non-sinonasal-related Olfactory Dysfunctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After a 4-month of olfactory training, 67.8% of post-infectious and 33.2% of post-traumatic patients achieved an increase of more than 6 points in TDI (Konstantinidis et al, 2013); and the percentages of olfactory improvement in controls for post-infectious and post-traumatic patients is 33 and 13%, respectively. A recent meta-analysis concluded that patients with post-infectious olfactory dysfunctions had 2.77 higher odds of achieving a clinically important difference in TDI scores compared to controls after receiving olfactory training (Kattar et al, 2020). Apart from olfactory training, short-term systemic and/or topical steroids were recommended in patients with post-infectious olfactory dysfunctions in a recent evidence-based review (Hura et al, 2020).…”

Section: Characteristics Of Olfactory Impairment In Post-infectious Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Implications of Psychophysical Olfactory Testing: Assessment, Diagnosis, and Treatment Outcome

Bleier

Wei

et al. 2021

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of ReviewOlfactory dysfunction dramatically impairs quality of life with a prevalence of 20% in the general adult population. Psychophysical olfactory testing has been widely used to evaluate the ability to smell due to its validated utility and feasibility in clinic. This review summarizes the current literature regarding psychophysical olfactory testing and the clinical relevance of the olfactory testing with different components. Furthermore, the review highlights the diagnosis and treatment value of olfactory subtests in patients with olfactory dysfunction.Recent FindingsWith the accumulation of studies of psychophysical olfactory testing in olfactory disorders, the clinical relevance of olfactory testing with different components is expanding. Different olfactory domains present with distinct olfactory processing and cortical activity. Psychophysical assessment of olfaction with three domains reveals different levels of olfactory processing and might assist with analyzing the pathophysiologic mechanism of the various olfactory disorders. Furthermore, olfactory thresholds provided the largest amount of non-redundant information to the olfactory diagnosis. Sinonasal olfactory dysfunction and non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction are emerging classifications of smell disorders with certain characteristics of olfactory impairment and different responses to the therapy including steroids, sinus surgery, and olfactory training.SummaryThese recent advancements should promote the understanding of psychophysical olfactory testing, the association between individual subcomponents and neurophysiological processes, and pave the way for precision assessment and treatment of the olfactory dysfunction.

show abstract

“…training (183). Therefore, this approach might be suitable for people suffering from permanent total or partial loss of olfactory function due to Covid-19.…”

Section: Als Unknownmentioning

confidence: 99%

Loss of Olfactory Function—Early Indicator for Covid-19, Other Viral Infections and Neurodegenerative Disorders

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The loss of the senses of smell (anosmia) and taste (ageusia) are rather common disorders, affecting up to 20% of the adult population. Yet, this condition has not received the attention it deserves, most probably because per se such a disorder is not life threatening. However, loss of olfactory function significantly reduces the quality of life of the affected patients, leading to dislike in food and insufficient, exaggerated or unbalanced food intake, unintentional exposure to toxins such as household gas, social isolation, depression, and an overall insecurity. Not only is olfactory dysfunction rather prevalent in the healthy population, it is, in many instances, also a correlate or an early indicator of a panoply of diseases. Importantly, olfactory dysfunction is linked to the two most prominent neurodegenerative disorders, Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease. Anosmia and hyposmia (reduced sense of smell) affect a majority of patients years before the onset of cognitive or motor symptoms, establishing olfactory dysfunction as early biomarker that can enable earlier diagnosis and preventative treatments. In the current health crisis caused by SARS-CoV2, anosmia and dysgeusia as early-onset symptoms in virus-positive patients may prove to be highly relevant and crucial for pre-symptomatic Covid-19 detection from a public health perspective, preceding by days the more classical respiratory tract symptoms such as cough, tightness of the chest or fever. Thus, the olfactory system seems to be at the frontline of pathologic assault, be it through pathogens or insults that can lead to or at least associate with neurodegeneration. The aim of this review is to assemble current knowledge from different medical fields that all share a common denominator, olfactory/gustatory dysfunction, and to distill overarching etiologies and disease progression mechanisms.

show abstract

Olfactory Training for Postviral Olfactory Dysfunction: Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Cited by 88 publications

References 38 publications

Patient Experiences of Post-Infectious Olfactory Dysfunction

Patient Experiences of Post-Infectious Olfactory Dysfunction

Clinical Implications of Psychophysical Olfactory Testing: Assessment, Diagnosis, and Treatment Outcome

Loss of Olfactory Function—Early Indicator for Covid-19, Other Viral Infections and Neurodegenerative Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About