Prospective Study in 355 Patients With Suspected COVID-19 Infection: Value of Cough, Subjective Hyposmia, and Hypogeusia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of certain symptoms in a population of health workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019 patients. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study. METHODS: The study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital from March 1 to April 7, 2020. Health workers with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection were included. The presence of COVID-19 was detected by using real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) methods. Positive and negative RT-PCR patients were used as case and control groups, respectively. This study analyzed the incidence of COVID-19 symptoms in both patient groups. Visual analog scales were used for self-assessment of smell and taste disorders, ranging from 0 (no perception) to 10 (excellent perception). RESULTS: There were 215 (60.6%) patients with positive RT-PCR and 140 (39.4%) patients with negative RT-PCR. The presence of symptoms such as hyposmia hypogeusia, dysthermia, and cough were strongly associated with a positive RT-PCR. The association of cough and subjective hyposmia had 5.46 times higher odds of having a positive test. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed that a fever higher than 37.45°C resulted in sensitivity and specificity of 0.65 and 0.61, respectively. A total of 138 cases (64.1%) and 114 cases (53%) had subjective hyposmia and hypogeusia, respectively. The 85.4% of these patients recovered olfactory function within the first 14 days of the onset of the symptoms. CONCLUSION: There is a significant association between positive RT-PCR and subjective hyposmia. The association of subjective hyposmia and cough increase significantly the odds of having a positive RT-PCR. The measurement of fever as the only method for screening of COVID-19 infection resulted in a poor association. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 130:2674-2679, 2020.

No more postural restrictions in posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo.

OBJECTIVE: To establish if postural restrictions are useful after repositioning maneuvers in posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective double-blind consecutive case study. SETTING: This study was conducted at a tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS: Three hundred ninety-one consecutive patients diagnosed of posterior canal BPPV with a positive Dix-Hallpike test. INTERVENTION: Two hundred seven patients diagnosed during the first year of our study were instructed to follow postural restrictions after repositioning maneuvers, and 184 patients who were diagnosed in the second year of our study did not receive any postural restriction after treatment. All of them were reevaluated 10 days later, and they were followed up until their symptoms resolved. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We compared the success rates of each treatment analyzing the number of maneuvers needed until symptoms resolved, recurrence rate, and subjective recovery at the end of treatment between both groups. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in number of maneuvers needed to resolve symptoms between patients who restricted their movements (80.2% of success with 1 maneuver) and those who did not (72.3%). Recurrence rate was not statistically different among groups (2.3 and 3.1%), and almost all patients declared to feel better after treatment in both groups (97.1 and 98.9%). CONCLUSION: Efficacy of Epley maneuver is not improved by postural restrictions. Therefore, we do not recommend any postural restrictions to patients with posterior canal BPPV.