Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Physiol Behav ; 271: 114331, 2023 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37595820

ABSTRACT

Transient loss of smell is a common symptom of influenza and other upper respiratory infections. Loss of taste is possible but rare with these illnesses, and patient reports of 'taste loss' typically arise from a taste / flavor confusion. Thus, initial reports from COVID-19 patients of loss of taste and chemesthesis (i.e., chemical somatosensation like warming or cooling) were met with skepticism until multiple studies confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections could disrupt these senses. Many studies have been based on self-report or on single time point assessments after acute illness was ended. Here, we describe intensive longitudinal data over 28 days from adults aged 18-45 years recruited in early 2021 (i.e., prior to the Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 waves). These individuals were either COVID-19 positive or close contacts (per U.S. CDC criteria at the time of the study) in the first half of 2021. Upon enrollment, all participants were given nose clips, blinded samples of commercial jellybeans (Sour Cherry and Cinnamon), and scratch-n-sniff odor identification test cards (ScentCheckPro), which they used for daily assessments. In COVID-19 cases who enrolled on or before Day 10 of infection, Gaussian Process Regression showed two distinct measures of function - odor identification and odor intensity - declined relative to controls (exposed individuals who never developed COVID-19). Because enrollment began upon exposure, some participants became ill only after enrollment, which allowed us to capture baseline ratings, onset of loss, and recovery. Data from these four cases and four age- and sex- matched controls were plotted over 28 days to create panel plots. Variables included mean orthonasal intensity of four odors (ScentCheckPro), perceived nasal blockage, oral burn (Cinnamon jellybeans), and sourness and sweetness (Sour Cherry jellybeans). Controls exhibited stable ratings over time. By contrast, COVID-19 cases showed sharp deviations over time. Changes in odor intensity or odor identification were not explained by nasal blockage. No single pattern of taste loss or recovery was apparent, implying different taste qualities might recover at different rates. Oral burn was transiently reduced for some before recovering quickly, suggesting acute loss may be missed in datasets collected only after illness ends. Collectively, intensive daily testing shows orthonasal smell, oral chemesthesis and taste were each altered by acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. This disruption was dyssynchronous for different modalities, with variable loss and recovery rates across both modalities and individuals.


Subject(s)
Ageusia , COVID-19 , Nasal Obstruction , Olfaction Disorders , Adult , Humans , COVID-19/complications , Smell , SARS-CoV-2 , Taste , Ageusia/complications , Nasal Obstruction/complications , Taste Disorders/etiology , Case-Control Studies , Olfaction Disorders/etiology
2.
medRxiv ; 2023 Mar 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37034638

ABSTRACT

Anosmia is common with respiratory virus infections, but loss of taste or chemesthesis is rare. Reports of true taste loss with COVID-19 were viewed skeptically until confirmed by multiple studies. Nasal menthol thresholds are elevated in some with prior COVID-19 infections, but data on oral chemesthesis are lacking. Many patients recover quickly, but precise timing and synchrony of recovery are unclear. Here, we collected broad sensory measures over 28 days, recruiting adults (18-45 years) who were COVID-19 positive or recently exposed (close contacts per U.S. CDC criteria at the time of the study) in the first half of 2021. Participants received nose clips, red commercial jellybeans (Sour Cherry and Cinnamon), and scratch-n-sniff cards (ScentCheckPro). Among COVID-19 cases who entered the study on or before Day 10 of infection, Gaussian Process Regression showed odor identification and odor intensity (two distinct measures of function) each declined relative to controls (close contacts who never developed COVID-19), but effects were larger for intensity than identification. To assess changes during early onset, we identified four COVID-19 cases who enrolled on or prior to Day 1 of their illness â€" this allowed for visualization of baseline ratings, loss, and recovery of function over time. Four controls were matched for age, gender, and race. Variables included sourness and sweetness (Sour Cherry jellybeans), oral burn (Cinnamon jellybeans), mean orthonasal intensity of four odors (ScentCheckPro), and perceived nasal blockage. Data were plotted over 28 days, creating panel plots for the eight cases and controls. Controls exhibited stable ratings over time. By contrast, COVID-19 cases showed sharp deviations over time. No single pattern of taste loss or recovery was apparent, implying different taste qualities might recover at different rates. Oral burn was transiently reduced for some before recovering quickly, suggesting acute loss may be missed in data collected after acute illness ends. Changes in odor intensity or odor identification were not explained by nasal blockage. Collectively, intensive daily testing shows orthonasal smell, oral chemesthesis and taste were each altered by acute COVID-19 infection, and this disruption was dyssynchronous for different modalities, with variable loss and recovery rates across modalities and individuals.

3.
Chem Senses ; 472022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36469087

ABSTRACT

Many widely used psychophysical olfactory tests have limitations that can create barriers to adoption. For example, tests that measure the ability to identify odors may confound sensory performance with memory recall, verbal ability, and prior experience with the odor. Conversely, classic threshold-based tests avoid these issues, but are labor intensive. Additionally, many commercially available tests are slow and may require a trained administrator, making them impractical for use in situations where time is at a premium or self-administration is required. We tested the performance of the Adaptive Olfactory Measure of Threshold (ArOMa-T)-a novel odor detection threshold test that employs an adaptive Bayesian algorithm paired with a disposable odorant delivery card-in a non-clinical sample of individuals (n = 534) at the 2021 Twins Day Festival in Twinsburg, OH. Participants successfully completed the test in under 3 min with a false alarm rate of 7.5% and a test-retest reliability of 0.61. Odor detection thresholds differed by sex (~3.2-fold lower for females) and age (~8.7-fold lower for the youngest versus the oldest age group), consistent with prior studies. In an exploratory analysis, we failed to observe evidence of detection threshold differences between participants who reported a history of COVID-19 and matched controls who did not. We also found evidence for broad-sense heritability of odor detection thresholds. Together, this study suggests the ArOMa-T can determine odor detection thresholds. Additional validation studies are needed to confirm the value of ArOMa-T in clinical or field settings where rapid and portable assessment of olfactory function is needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Olfaction Disorders , Female , Humans , Odorants , Reproducibility of Results , Bayes Theorem , Sensory Thresholds , Smell , Olfaction Disorders/diagnosis
4.
medRxiv ; 2022 Apr 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35313597

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Many widely-used psychophysical tests of olfaction have limitations that can create barriers to adoption outside research settings. For example, tests that measure the ability to identify odors may confound sensory performance with memory recall, verbal ability, and past experience with the odor. Conversely, threshold-based tests typically avoid these issues, but are labor intensive. Additionally, many commercially available olfactory tests are slow and may require a trained administrator, making them impractical for use in a short wellness visit or other broad clinical assessment. METHODS: We tested the performance of the Adaptive Olfactory Measure of Threshold (ArOMa-T) -- a novel odor detection threshold test that employs an adaptive Bayesian algorithm paired with a disposable odor-delivery card -- in a non-clinical sample of individuals (n=534) at the 2021 Twins Day Festival in Twinsburg, OH. RESULTS: Participants successfully completed the test in under 3 min with a false alarm rate of 9.6% and a test-retest reliability of 0.61. Odor detection thresholds differed by sex (~3.2-fold) and between the youngest and oldest age groups (~8.7-fold), consistent with prior work. In an exploratory analysis, we failed to observe evidence of detection threshold differences between participants who reported a history of COVID-19 and matched controls who did not. We also found evidence for broad-sense heritability of odor detection thresholds. CONCLUSION: Together, these data indicate the ArOMa-T can determine odor detection thresholds. The ArOMa-T may be particularly valuable in clinical or field settings where rapid and portable assessment of olfactory function is needed.

5.
Food Qual Prefer ; 97: 104483, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34848930

ABSTRACT

In March 2020, the Global Consortium of Chemosensory Research (GCCR) was founded by chemosensory researchers to address emerging reports of unusual smell and taste dysfunction arising from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Over the next year, the GCCR used a highly collaborative model, along with contemporary Open Science practices, to produce multiple high impact publications on chemosensation and COVID19. This invited manuscript describes the founding of the GCCR, the tools and approaches it used, and a summary of findings to date. These findings are contextualized within a summary of some of the broader insights about chemosensation (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) and COVID19 gained over the last 18 months, including potential mechanisms of loss. Also, it includes a detailed discussion of some current Open Science approaches and practices used by the GCCR to increase transparency, rigor, and reproducibility.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...