OBJECTIVES: Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is common and carries significant personal and societal burden. Accurate assessment is necessary for good clinical and research practice but is highly dependent on the assessment technique used. Current practice with regards to UK/international clinical assessment is unknown. We aimed to capture current clinical practice, with reference to contemporaneously available guidelines. We further aimed to compare UK to international practice. DESIGN: Anonymous online questionnaire with cross-sectional non-probability sampling. Subgroup analysis according to subspeciality training in rhinology ('rhinologists' and 'non-rhinologists') was performed, with geographical comparisons only made according to subgroup. PARTICIPANTS: ENT surgeons who assess olfaction. RESULTS: Responses were received from 465 clinicians (217 from UK and 17 countries total). Country-specific response rate varied, with the lowest rate being obtained from Japan (1.4%) and highest from Greece (72.5%). Most UK clinicians do not perform psychophysical smell testing during any of the presented clinical scenarios-though rhinologists did so more often than non-rhinologists. The most frequent barriers to testing related to service provision (e.g., time/funding limitations). Whilst there was variability in practice, in general, international respondents performed psychophysical testing more frequently than those from the UK. Approximately 3/4 of all respondents said they would like to receive training in psychophysical smell testing. Patient reported outcome measures were infrequently used in the UK/internationally. More UK respondents performed diagnostic MRI scanning than international respondents. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive UK-based, and only international survey of clinical practice in the assessment of OD. We present recommendations to improve practice, including increased education and funding for psychophysical smell testing. We hope this will promote accurate and reliable olfactory assessment, as is the accepted standard in other sensory systems.
BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence (RWE) is a valuable instrument to better understand the patient journey and effectiveness of therapies. RWE on the prevalence of uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and CRS natural course of disease across Europe is scarce. In addition, there is limited RWE that enables comparison of the effectiveness of marketed therapies including topical or systemic corticosteroids, sinus surgery, or biologics. OBJECTIVE: To establish an international CHRonic rhINOSinusitis Outcome Registry (CHRINOSOR) based on real-world data collection enabled by mobile health technology. METHODOLOGY: A digital platform, Galenus Health, supporting patients and physicians in the management of chronic respiratory diseases, is used to collect data on patient profile, disease history, patient outcomes, and a set of relevant clinical outcomes. Adult patients with a diagnosis of CRS are eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: A collaborative scientific network of 17 university ear-nose-throat (ENT) clinics from 10 European countries has been established with the aim to collect real-world data in a longitudinal and standardized manner. The Galenus Health digital platform is currently being implemented in these ENT clinics taking into account legal, privacy, and data security aspects. Up to 300 patients have already been included. CONCLUSIONS: CHRINOSOR is a collaborative effort that aims at improving our understanding of CRS, its comorbidities, and the effectiveness of its treatments. Ultimately, these insights will guide us as scientific community to develop future care pathways informed by RWE.
- MeSH
- Chronic Disease MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Adrenal Cortex Hormones therapeutic use MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Nasal Polyps * drug therapy MeSH
- Rhinitis * therapy drug therapy MeSH
- Sinusitis * therapy drug therapy MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Review MeSH
BACKGROUND: Definitions are essential for effective communication and discourse, particularly in science. They allow the shared understanding of a thought or idea, generalization of knowledge, and comparison across scientific investigation. The current terms describing olfactory dysfunction are vague and overlapping. SUMMARY: As a group of clinical olfactory researchers, we propose the standardization of the terms "dysosmia," "anosmia," "hyposmia," "normosmia," "hyperosmia," "olfactory intolerance," "parosmia," and "phantosmia" (or "olfactory hallucination") in olfaction-related communication, with specific definitions in this text. KEY MESSAGES: The words included in this paper were determined as those which are most frequently used in the context of olfactory function and dysfunction, in both clinical and research settings. Despite widespread use in publications, however, there still exists some disagreement in the literature regarding the definitions of terms related to olfaction. Multiple overlapping and imprecise terms that are currently in use are confusing and hinder clarity and universal understanding of these concepts. There is a pressing need to have a unified agreement on the definitions of these olfactory terms by researchers working in the field of chemosensory sciences. With the increased interest in olfaction, precise use of these terms will improve the ability to integrate and advance knowledge in this field.
The frequent association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and olfactory dysfunction is creating an unprecedented demand for a treatment of the olfactory loss. Systemic corticosteroids have been considered as a therapeutic option. However, based on current literature, we call for caution using these treatments in early COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction because: (1) evidence supporting their usefulness is weak; (2) the rate of spontaneous recovery of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction is high; and (3) corticosteroids have well-known potential adverse effects. We encourage randomized placebo-controlled trials investigating the efficacy of systemic steroids in this indication and strongly emphasize to initially consider smell training, which is supported by a robust evidence base and has no known side effects.
- MeSH
- Global Health MeSH
- Olfactory Mucosa drug effects virology MeSH
- COVID-19 * complications physiopathology MeSH
- Adrenal Cortex Hormones pharmacology MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Medication Therapy Management standards statistics & numerical data MeSH
- Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions diagnosis etiology prevention & control MeSH
- Needs Assessment MeSH
- Olfaction Disorders * drug therapy epidemiology etiology MeSH
- SARS-CoV-2 pathogenicity MeSH
- Remission, Spontaneous MeSH
- Research Design MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
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.
- MeSH
- Betacoronavirus isolation & purification MeSH
- Taste MeSH
- Smell MeSH
- COVID-19 MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Coronavirus Infections complications diagnosis virology MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Pandemics MeSH
- Taste Disorders etiology virology MeSH
- Olfaction Disorders etiology virology MeSH
- Surveys and Questionnaires MeSH
- SARS-CoV-2 MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Somatosensory Disorders etiology virology MeSH
- Pneumonia, Viral complications diagnosis virology MeSH
- Self Report MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Young Adult MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
