A threshold-like measure for the assessment of olfactory sensitivity: the "random" procedure

Abstract

Many tests of olfactory dysfunction are either too complex, too expensive, or too time-consuming to be of use in routine clinical testing. Thus, the present multicenter study was undertaken to investigate a new approach, the so-called "random" test. In this test different concentrations of citronellal and phenyl ethyl alcohol are applied according to a pre-established order; patients are asked to identify the odor if possible. The test score is the sum of correctly identified odors. Test administration takes about 10 min. Two studies were performed. Basic characteristics of the test were explored in experiment 1 in 176 healthy subjects (76 male, 100 female; age 12-85 years, mean age 30 years), namely test-retest reliability, correlation with other measures of olfactory sensitivity, and sensitivity of the test to differences in age and gender. In the second experiment the test was tried in 97 patients (45 male, 52 female; age 19-78 years, mean age 47 years) in a clinical environment to investigate its usefulness in diagnosing olfactory loss. The "random"-test was found (1) to exhibit a test-retest reliability similar to that reported for established measures of olfactory function (r = 0.71; P < 0.001), (2) to correlate with other measures of olfactory sensitivity (0.82 > r > 0.60; P < 0.001), (3) to differentiate between expected differences in olfactory sensitivity in relation to gender (t > 2.602, P < 0.011), and (4) to discriminate between different degrees of olfactory loss (F > 36.6, P < 0.001). Based on these data, and the fact that the new test requires little time and is easy to use, this approach can be expected to suit clinical needs.

Human awareness and uses of odor cues in everyday life: Results from a questionnaire study in children

“…Specifically, girls reported higher attention and reactivity to social odors of others and self, to some environmental odors (home and outdoor, car, tobacco smoke) and to affect-laden odors (items 5 -Odors sought when sad and 6 -Treasured odorous objects), but not to food odors. Taken together, these results concur with current data on gender differences in affective reactivity to odors (Doty, 1986;Olofsson & Nordin, 2004), olfactory cognition (Cain, 1982;Doty et al, 1984; and sensitivity (Dalton et al, 2002;Kobal et al, 2001;Koelega & Köster, 1974). To understand why growing up as a female or a male leads to early different chemo-perceptual and cognitive outcomes, it seems necessary to untie these "package" variables which are not explanatory per se, but rather represent a collection of psychobiological and sociocultural determinants (Gauvain, 1995).…”

Differences in peripheral sensory input to the olfactory bulb between male and female mice

“…It is suggestive that these results parallel the common observation that females exhibit superior olfactory capabilities than males1491011121314. Sensory performance in a noisy environment is typically modeled as information accumulation over time, as demonstrated by the speed-accuracy tradeoff for odor detection and discrimination4249.…”

“…Females tend to exhibit enhanced sensitivity to odors61011121314 as well as better discrimination and identification abilities1516 than males.…”

Executive summary of European Task Force document on diagnostic tools in rhinology

“…Nevertheless it is used to diagnose aspirin intolerance in the context of aspirin hypersensitivity with respiratory manifestations. The nasal challenge with aspirin was introduced later than the oral and bronchial challenge (23) , and can be used in patients with severe asthma in whom oral or bronchial aspirin challenges are University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) (24) Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center Test (CCCRC) (25) Smell diskettes test (26) Odourant confusion matrix (27) Dutch odour identification test (GITU) (28) YN-odour Identification Test (YN-OIT) (29) T&T Olfactometer (30) San Diego Odor Identification Test (SDOIT) (31) Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test (CC-SIT) (32) Combined olfactory test (COT) (33) Sniffin'-Sticks (34) Candy smell test (CST) (35) Alcohol Sniff Test (AST) (36) Culturally Adjusted University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (CA-UPSIT) (37) Kremer et al (38) Scandinavian Odour-Identification Test (SOIT) (39) Pocket Smell Test (40) Eloit and Trotier Olfactory Test (41) Ramdon Test (42) Four-minute odour identification test (43) Barcelona Smell Test (BAST-24) (44) Nez du Vin smell test (45) As for exhaled NO (eNO), nasal (nNO) can be measured by chemiluminescence. Guidelines for measurement have been published (46) .…”