OBJECTIVE: We addressed the question if patients with multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) differ from participants with self-reported odor sensitivity without MCS and asymptomatic controls in terms of chemosensory, cognitive, and clinical psychological endpoints. METHODS: In a clinical study 23 MCS patients, 21 participants with self-reported odor sensitivity, and 23 controls were investigated using electrophysiological and psychophysical olfactometric tests [chemosensory-event-related potentials (CSERP), olfactory thresholds, odor identification, trigeminal sensitivity]. The participants filled in a mood list, a list of complaints (BL), a Symptom Check List, a State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and an MCS questionnaire. RESULTS: The olfactometric investigations revealed no significant differences between the groups. The MCS group reached significantly higher scores on negative mood states following odorant exposure, on health complaints, global indices, and the somatization subscale of the Symptom Check List, trait and state anxiety and symptoms, and triggering matters of the MCS questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal that neither olfactory functions, nor chemosensory or cognitive olfactory information processing are impaired in MCS patients. They rather support findings of altered psychological profile and moderate psychopathology.
OBJECTIVE: We addressed the question if patients with multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) differ from participants with self-reported odor sensitivity without MCS and asymptomatic controls in terms of chemosensory, cognitive, and clinical psychological endpoints. METHODS: In a clinical study 23 MCS patients, 21 participants with self-reported odor sensitivity, and 23 controls were investigated using electrophysiological and psychophysical olfactometric tests [chemosensory-event-related potentials (CSERP), olfactory thresholds, odor identification, trigeminal sensitivity]. The participants filled in a mood list, a list of complaints (BL), a Symptom Check List, a State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and an MCS questionnaire. RESULTS: The olfactometric investigations revealed no significant differences between the groups. The MCS group reached significantly higher scores on negative mood states following odorant exposure, on health complaints, global indices, and the somatization subscale of the Symptom Check List, trait and state anxiety and symptoms, and triggering matters of the MCS questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal that neither olfactory functions, nor chemosensory or cognitive olfactory information processing are impaired in MCS patients. They rather support findings of altered psychological profile and moderate psychopathology.
Authors: Kirsten Sucker; Ralf Both; Michael Bischoff; Rainer Guski; Ursula Krämer; Gerhard Winneke Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2007-09-29 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Linus Andersson; Anna-Sara Claeson; Thomas Meinertz Dantoft; Sine Skovbjerg; Nina Lind; Steven Nordin Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-04-28 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Sine Skovbjerg; Alice Rasmussen; Robert Zachariae; Lone Schmidt; Rikke Lund; Jesper Elberling Journal: Environ Health Prev Med Date: 2011-03-01 Impact factor: 3.674
Authors: Sine Skovbjerg; Jeanne Duus Johansen; Alice Rasmussen; Hanne Thorsen; Jesper Elberling Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2009 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Marlene Pacharra; Stefan Kleinbeck; Michael Schäper; Meinolf Blaszkewicz; Christoph van Thriel Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2016-04-28 Impact factor: 3.015