Self-Reported Hypersensitivity to Smells: Objective Evidence for Hyposmia, not Hyperosmia.

OBJECTIVE: To compare, using state-of-the-art psychophysical tests, the olfactory function of patients complaining and not complaining of olfactory hypersensitivity. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional. SETTING: The Smell and Taste Center at the University of Pennsylvania. METHODS: University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) scores were obtained from 148 patients complaining of hyperosmia and 494 patients with no such complaints; detection threshold test scores were obtained from 77 and 483 patients of these respective groups. The effects of subject group, age, and sex on the test scores were assessed using analyses of variance. Categorical variables were evaluated by χ2. Responses to items within a detailed intake questionnaire, for example, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), were also evaluated. RESULTS: Unexpectedly, those complaining of hyperosmia had lower olfactory test scores than those with no such complaints (respective UPSIT means [95% confidence interval [CIs]] = 27.86 (26.85, 28.87) and 32.19 (31.67, 32.71); P < .001; respective threshold means (log vol/vol) = -4.49 (-4.89, -4.09) and -5.22 (-5.36, -5.06); P < .001). Remarkably, 70.95% of the self-identified hyperosmics exhibited mild to severe microsmia. The hyposmia complainers also exhibited elevated BDI scores (11.02 [9.53, 12.51] vs 7.58 [6.80, 8.34]). CONCLUSION: When objectively tested, many patients who complain of hypersensitivity to odors are actually less sensitive to them. The basis of this phenomenon is unclear. It could reflect the presence of emotionally disturbing altered smell sensations, or one or more comorbidities, such as hypochondria or osmophobia. These findings point to the importance of objective testing of persons with complaints of chemosensory dysfunction and reiterate the inaccuracy of self-reports.

Long-Term Taste and Smell Outcomes After COVID-19.

Importance: Self-report surveys suggest that long-lasting taste deficits may occur after SARS-CoV-2 infection, influencing nutrition, safety, and quality of life. However, self-reports of taste dysfunction are inaccurate, commonly reflecting deficits due to olfactory not taste system pathology; hence, quantitative testing is needed to verify the association of post-COVID-19 condition with taste function. Objective: To use well-validated self-administered psychophysical tests to investigate the association of COVID-19 with long-term outcomes in taste and smell function. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide cross-sectional study included individuals with and without a prior history of COVID-19 recruited from February 2020 to August 2023 from a social media website (Reddit) and bulletin board advertisements. In the COVID-19 cohort, there was a mean of 395 days (95% CI, 363-425 days) between diagnosis and testing. Exposure: History of COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 53-item Waterless Empirical Taste Test (WETT) and 40-item University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) were used to assess taste and smell function. Total WETT and UPSIT scores and WETT subtest scores of sucrose, citric acid, sodium chloride, caffeine, and monosodium glutamate were assessed for groups with and without a COVID-19 history. The association of COVID-19 with taste and smell outcomes was assessed using analysis of covariance, χ2, and Fisher exact probability tests. Results: Tests were completed by 340 individuals with prior COVID-19 (128 males [37.6%] and 212 females [62.4%]; mean [SD] age, 39.04 [14.35] years) and 434 individuals with no such history (154 males [35.5%] and 280 females [64.5%]; mean (SD) age, 39.99 [15.61] years). Taste scores did not differ between individuals with and without previous COVID-19 (total WETT age- and sex-adjusted mean score, 33.41 [95% CI, 32.37-34.45] vs 33.46 [95% CI, 32.54-34.38]; P = .94). In contrast, UPSIT scores were lower in the group with previous COVID-19 than the group without previous COVID-19 (mean score, 34.39 [95% CI, 33.86-34.92] vs 35.86 [95% CI, 35.39-36.33]; P < .001]); 103 individuals with prior COVID-19 (30.3%) and 91 individuals without prior COVID-19 (21.0%) had some degree of dysfunction (odds ratio, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.18-2.27]). The SARS-CoV-2 variant present at the time of infection was associated with smell outcomes; individuals with original untyped and Alpha variant infections exhibited more loss than those with other variant infections; for example, total to severe loss occurred in 10 of 42 individuals with Alpha variant infections (23.8%) and 7 of 52 individuals with original variant infections (13.5%) compared with 12 of 434 individuals with no COVID-19 history (2.8%) (P < .001 for all). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, taste dysfunction as measured objectively was absent 1 year after exposure to COVID-19 while some smell loss remained in nearly one-third of individuals with this exposure, likely explaining taste complaints of many individuals with post-COVID-19 condition. Infection with earlier untyped and Alpha variants was associated with the greatest degree of smell loss.

The 8-item NHANES pocket smell test®: Normative data.

This study provides normative data useful for interpreting scores from the Pocket Smell Test® (PST®), a brief "scratch & sniff" neuropsychological olfactory screening test comprised of 8 items from the 40-item University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT®). We combined 3,485 PST® scores from the 2013 to 2014 National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES) of persons 40 years of age and older with equivalent PST® items extracted from an UPSIT® database of 3,900 persons ranging in age from 5 to 99 years. Decade-related age- and gender-adjusted percentile normative data were established across the entire age spectrum. Cut-points for defining clinically useful categories of anosmia, probable microsmia, and normosmia were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. An age-related decline in test scores was evident for both sexes after the age of 40 years, with women outperforming men. Based on the ROC analyses, subjects scoring 3 or less (AUC = 0.81) defines anosmia. Regardless of sex, a score of 7 or 8 on the N-PST® signifies normal function (AUC of 0.71). Probable microsmia is classified as scores extending from 3 to 6. These data provide an accurate means for interpreting PST® scores within a number of clinical and applied settings.