Validation of Olfactory Questionnaire in Koreans: an Alternative for Conventional Psychophysical Olfactory Tests.

BACKGROUND: The patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a worldwide pandemic infection, frequently complain of olfactory disorders. However, psychophysical olfactory tests performed by an examiner are very difficult in these highly infectious patients. This study aimed to develop and validate a questionnaire for olfactory function that can be readily used to evaluate olfactory loss. METHODS: Fourteen smell-related questions were created based on smells familiar to Koreans. Among them, questions with a κ value of 0.6 or higher were finally selected through a test-retest reliability analysis. The correlations between the scores of the olfactory questionnaire and those of olfactory function tests (Butanol Threshold Test [BTT] and Cross Cultural Smell Identification Test [CCSIT]) were analyzed. To evaluate the predictive ability of the questionnaire and elicit cutoff values, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated. RESULTS: Out of the 14 questions in the questionnaire, 11 (κ > 0.6) were selected for the olfactory questionnaire. We analyzed 2,273 subjects, and there was a significant correlation between the total score of the olfactory questionnaire and the BTT (r = 0.643, P < 0.001) or CCSIT (r = 0.615, P < 0.001) scores. ROC curves for the olfactory questionnaire, BTT, and CCSIT all demonstrated high predictive power to discriminate anosmia and severe hyposmia from normosmia. Regarding mild to moderate hyposmia, however, ROC curve for the olfactory questionnaire alone showed high predictive power of discrimination from normosmia. Based on the results of ROC curves among the subclasses, we suggest the classification of the total score of the questionnaire as 0-4, 5-17, 18-27, 28-41, and 42-44, for anosmia, severe hyposmia, moderate hyposmia, mild hyposmia, and normosmia, respectively. CONCLUSION: The total scores of the questionnaires correlated with the BTT and CCSIT scores. The symptom questionnaire for olfactory dysfunction may be useful as an alternative tool for olfactory function testing, when unavailable.

Regional and Chronological Variation of Chemosensory Dysfunction in COVID-19: a Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction are frequently reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the reported prevalence of olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction varies widely, and the reason for the inter-study differences is unclear. Hence, in this meta-analysis, we performed subgroup analyses to investigate the factors that contribute to the inter-study variability in the prevalence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction. METHODS: Out of 943 citations, we included 55 eligible studies with 13,527 patients with COVID-19 for a meta-analysis. Calculating the data extracted from each study, the weighted summary prevalence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction was estimated using a Freeman-Tukey transformation with models based on random-effects assumptions. A meta-analysis of variance compared the prevalence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction according to regional, chronological, demographic, and methodologic factors, respectively. RESULTS: The overall pooled prevalence rates of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction were 51.4% and 47.5%, respectively, in the random-effect model. In subgroup analyses, the prevalence rates of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction were significantly different among four geographical regions (both P < 0.001, respectively). Although the prevalence rates of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction did not significantly differ according to the time of enrollment, the subgroup analyses including only studies from the same geographical region (Europe) revealed a significant difference in olfactory dysfunction according to the time of enrollment. CONCLUSION: The regional and chronological differences in the prevalence rates of olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions partly explain the wide inter-study variability.