Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunction in COVID-19 Patients: A Tertiary Care Institute Experience in India

Abstract

COVID-19 epidemic has varied spectrum of symptoms. With this study we aim to evaluate prevalence of Olfactory and Gustatory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients. To assess Olfactory and Gustatory dysfunction in COVID-19 Patients in Indian Population. Settings and Design: Prospective observational study. RT-PCR proven COVID-19 patients were enrolled in the study. Detailed history and olfactory function and Taste function were evaluated. Patient with symptoms of olfactory dysfunction were subjected to fill (sQOD-NS questionnaire). Re-evaluation was done weekly till the time of discharge. Analysis was done with Wilcoxon test with help of SPSS software. A total of 152 patients (Male-78, Female-74) completed the study after weekly evaluation. Olfactory and Gustatory dysfunction was seen in 28 (18.41%) and 20 (13.15%). Mean duration of symptoms was 2.4444 ± 0.352 days. Olfactory dysfunction was the first presenting symptom in 11 out of 152 patients (7.23%). Mean QD-NOS score in patients with Anosmia and Hyposmia (28 patients) was 11.4 ± 2.01 and 13.61 ± 2.82 at 1st evaluation, 20.3 ± 1.49 and 20.33 ± 1.57 at 7th day and 21 in both subgroups at 14th day follow up. Dysgeusia was noticed in 20/152 patients (13.15%). Recovery in olfactory dysfunction and Dysgeusia was complete in all patients. Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions are significant part of clinical spectrum of COVID-19 disease In Indian Population.

Olfactory recovery following infection with COVID-19: A systematic review

“…The remaining 18 studies were conducted in other regions (a pie chart showing distribution is included in the supplementary data provided— S1 Fig ). 10 studies were conducted in Asia: Turkey (n = 5) [ 18 , 27 , 38 , 41 , 50 ], Iran (n = 2) [ 22 , 55 ], India (n = 2) [ 33 , 52 ], Israel (n = 1) [ 32 ]. Four studies were conducted in North America: United States (n = 4), [ 21 , 42 , 48 , 51 ].…”

“…Two studies were conducted in Africa: Egypt (n = 2) [ 34 , 49 ], and two in South America: Brazil (n = 1) [ 53 ], Chile (n = 1) [ 15 , 53 ]. Of the 44 studies, twenty-five (56.8%) reported no funding requirements for the project [ 16 , 18 , 19 , 22 , 27 – 30 , 32 , 33 , 39 , 40 , 42 – 47 , 49 – 51 , 53 , 58 ]; six (13.6%) studies reported funding for the project (sources included academic institutions, government and not-for-profit organizations) [ 15 , 24 , 25 , 31 , 48 , 57 ], and thirteen (29.5%) did not report whether funding was provided [ 17 , 21 , 23 , 26 , 37 , 38 , 52 , 54 – 56 , 58 , 59 ].…”

“…COVID-19 was confirmed by RT-PCR test in all but six studies that either used RT-PCR or serology as a diagnostic tool of COVID-19 [ 25 , 48 , 51 , 54 , 58 , 60 ]. Although most of the patients recruited within studies were not hospitalized due to COVID-19 infection [ 17 , 21 – 26 , 28 , 30 – 32 , 35 , 36 , 41 – 43 , 45 , 47 – 49 , 51 , 54 , 56 , 60 ], some did include patients hospitalized either for monitoring purposes or quarantine [ 18 , 19 , 33 , 52 , 55 , 57 – 59 ]. Twelve studies included a mixture of hospitalized and non hospitalized patients [ 15 , 19 , 20 , 27 , 29 , 34 , 38 – 40 , 46 , 50 , 53 ].…”

“…The majority of studies did not report data on ethnicity. In 29 studies the proportion of patients with anosmia, hyposmia and normosmia was available [ 15 – 18 , 20 , 22 , 24 – 26 , 28 , 30 – 36 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 45 , 48 , 50 , 52 , 55 – 60 ]. In eight studies, all patients had olfactory dysfunction at study baseline [ 17 , 18 , 24 , 25 , 34 , 40 , 56 , 57 ].…”

The D614G virus mutation enhances anosmia in COVID-19 patients: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies from South Asia

“…Fifteen studies reported anosmia prevalence in eighteen cohorts with a total of 7,247 COVID-19 patients from regions where the D614 virus was dominant: three studies from Kuwait and Singapore [42][43][44] and twelve from India or Pakistan. [45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56] We compared such data with the results obtained in 25 studies reporting on 25 cohorts with a total of 9,626 South Asian patients from the Indian subcontinent (India and Bangladesh) and Oman, when the G614 virus had become dominant (Table 1, illustrated in Fig. 3A, B).…”