Shristi Rawal1, Howard J Hoffman2, Audrey K Chapo1, Valerie B Duffy1. 1. Department of Allied Health Sciences, College of Agriculture, Health, and Natural Resources, University of Connecticut-UCONN, 358 Mansfield Road, Box U1101, Storrs, CT 06269-2101, USA. 2. Epidemiology & Statistics Program, Division of Scientific Programs, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health, Suite 8300, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-9670, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The 2011-14 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey chemosensory protocol asks adults to self-rate their orthonasal (via nostrils) and retronasal (via mouth) smell abilities for subsequent odor identification testing. From data collected with a similar protocol, we aimed to identify a self-reported olfactory index that showed the best sensitivity (correctly identifying dysfunction) and specificity (correctly indentifying normosmia) with measured olfaction. METHODS: In home-based testing, 121 independent-living older women (age 73±7 years) reported their olfactory function by interviewer-administered survey. Olfactory function was measured orthonasally via composite (odor threshold, identification task) or identification task alone. RESULTS: Only 16 % of women self-rated "below average" smell function. More women perceived loss of smell (38 %) or flavor (30 %) with aging. The rate of measured dysfunction was 30 % by composite (threshold and identification) and 21.5 % by identification task, the latter misclassifying some mild dysfunction as normosmia. An index of self-rated smell function and perceived loss yielded the most favorable sensitivity (65 %) and specificity (77 %) to measured function. Self-rated olfaction showed better agreement with severe measured dysfunction; mild dysfunction was less noticed. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported indices that query about current and perceived changes in smell and flavor with aging showed better sensitivity estimates than those previously reported. Specificity was somewhat lower-some older adults may correctly perceive loss unidentified in a single assessment, or have a retronasal impairment that was undetected by an orthonasal measure. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings should inform self-rated measures that screen for severe olfactory dysfunction in clinical/community settings where testing is not routine.
INTRODUCTION: The 2011-14 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey chemosensory protocol asks adults to self-rate their orthonasal (via nostrils) and retronasal (via mouth) smell abilities for subsequent odor identification testing. From data collected with a similar protocol, we aimed to identify a self-reported olfactory index that showed the best sensitivity (correctly identifying dysfunction) and specificity (correctly indentifying normosmia) with measured olfaction. METHODS: In home-based testing, 121 independent-living older women (age 73±7 years) reported their olfactory function by interviewer-administered survey. Olfactory function was measured orthonasally via composite (odor threshold, identification task) or identification task alone. RESULTS: Only 16 % of women self-rated "below average" smell function. More women perceived loss of smell (38 %) or flavor (30 %) with aging. The rate of measured dysfunction was 30 % by composite (threshold and identification) and 21.5 % by identification task, the latter misclassifying some mild dysfunction as normosmia. An index of self-rated smell function and perceived loss yielded the most favorable sensitivity (65 %) and specificity (77 %) to measured function. Self-rated olfaction showed better agreement with severe measured dysfunction; mild dysfunction was less noticed. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported indices that query about current and perceived changes in smell and flavor with aging showed better sensitivity estimates than those previously reported. Specificity was somewhat lower-some older adults may correctly perceive loss unidentified in a single assessment, or have a retronasal impairment that was undetected by an orthonasal measure. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings should inform self-rated measures that screen for severe olfactory dysfunction in clinical/community settings where testing is not routine.
Entities:
Keywords:
Aging; Females; Health status; Odor identification; Odor threshold; Smell
Authors: Claire Murphy; Carla R Schubert; Karen J Cruickshanks; Barbara E K Klein; Ronald Klein; David M Nondahl Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-11-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Sarah-Grace Glennon; Tania Huedo-Medina; Shristi Rawal; Howard J Hoffman; Mark D Litt; Valerie B Duffy Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-05-21 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Dara R Adams; Kristen E Wroblewski; David W Kern; Michael J Kozloski; William Dale; Martha K McClintock; Jayant M Pinto Journal: Chem Senses Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 3.160
Authors: Immacolata Cristina Nettore; Luigi Maione; Silvio Desiderio; Emma De Nisco; Fabiana Franchini; Giuseppe Palatucci; Paola Ungaro; Elena Cantone; Paolo Emidio Macchia; Annamaria Colao Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Xiuli Dan; Noah Wechter; Samuel Gray; Joy G Mohanty; Deborah L Croteau; Vilhelm A Bohr Journal: Ageing Res Rev Date: 2021-07-27 Impact factor: 11.788