Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ; 2022 Aug 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2245030

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To examine if the short formed Sniffin Sticks Parosmia Test (SSParoT), a test for parosmia can distinguish cases with parosmia from cases without parosmia. METHODS: In this study, 63 patients with postviral olfactory dysfunction were investigated including both COVID and non-COVID cases. The age, symptom duration, degree of parosmia/phantosmia was collected. For olfactory function, the Sniffin Sticks olfactory score was obtained including scores for odor threshold, discrimination and identification. For assessment of parosmic changes, the short SSParoT was adopted and both hedonic range (HedRang) and direction (HedDir) was calculated. RESULTS: The mean HedRang of patients with parosmia (2.35, standard deviation, SD = 1.40) and without parosmia (2.78, SD = 1.09) was smaller than that in controls (4.5, SD = 2.15). However, the mean HedDir of both parosmia (- 0.32, SD = 0.98) and non-parosmia patients (0.04, SD = 1.07) was similar to controls (- 0.1, SD = 1.55). When considering that the 10th percentile of the distribution of SSParoT score should distinguish between patients with and without parosmia, the sensitivity of the HedRang was 29% and specificity was 67%. For HedDir, the sensitivity was 6% and specificity was 100%. Only the odor identification score (r = 0.34, p = 0.01) discriminated parosmia and non-parosmia while other measures including HedRang and HedDir did not. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that the short SSParoT score could not distinguish patients with parosmia from patients without parosmia. Although the SSParoT represents an innovative approach to assess parosmia, and could be useful in the tracking of parosmic changes, the development of measures to diagnose parosmia in an objective way remains a challenge.

2.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ; 19(9):5777, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1837243

ABSTRACT

Hospital workers have increased exposure risk of healthcare-associated infections due to the frontline nature of their work. Olfactory dysfunction is highly prevalent. The objectives for this investigation are to study the prevalence of long-lasting olfactory dysfunction associated with COVID-19 infection in hospital workers during the first pandemic wave, to identify clinical characteristics and associated symptomatology, and to analyze how many patients with COVID-19 infection had developed olfactory dysfunction during infection and maintained a reduced olfactory function for approximately 10 weeks after diagnosis. Between June and July of 2020, a cross-sectional study was carried out at the Hospital Central de la Cruz Roja San José and Santa Adela in Madrid, Spain. One hundred sixty-four participants were included, of which 110 were patient-facing healthcare staff and 54 were non-patient-facing healthcare staff. Participants were split into three groups, according to COVID-19 diagnosis and presence of COVID-19 related olfactory symptomatology. Participants were asked to complete a structured online questionnaire along with Sniffin’ Stick Olfactory Test measurements. In this study, 88 participants were confirmed for COVID-19 infection, 59 of those participants also reported olfactory symptomatology. The prevalence of COVID-19 infection was 11.35%, and the prevalence for olfactory dysfunction was 67.05%. Olfactory dysfunction associated with COVID-19 infection leads to long-lasting olfactory loss. Objective assessment with Sniffin’ Stick Olfactory Test points to odor identification as the most affected process. Lemon, liquorice, solvent, and rose are the odors that are worst recognized. Mint, banana, solvent, garlic, coffee, and pineapple, although they are identified, are perceived with less intensity. The findings of this study confirmed a high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among the hospital workers.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL