Agnieszka Sorokowska1,2, Anna Oleszkiewicz3,4, Amir Minovi5, Claus Günther Konnerth6, Thomas Hummel3. 1. Smell & Taste Clinic, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany, sorokowska@gmail.com. 2. Institute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland, sorokowska@gmail.com. 3. Smell & Taste Clinic, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany. 4. Institute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland. 5. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ruhr University Bochum, St. Elisabeth Hospital, Bochum, Germany. 6. Karl-Hansen Medical Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Bad Lippspringe, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Classical, longer olfactory tests are associated with difficulties in everyday practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical utility of the Q-Sticks test within the context of a multicenter study. METHODS: A total of 333 subjects, aged between 12 and 88 years, completed a 3-item Q-Sticks test and a longer Sniffin' Sticks identification test. We analyzed the sensitivity and specificity of the test results for different cutoffs for anosmia and hyposmia. RESULTS: Our study showed that the test can be used on subjects aged 12 years and older, regardless of their sex. The data indicated a test sensitivity and specificity of 91.8 and 92%, respectively, with a score of 2 taken as a cutoff for olfactory dysfunction. Conversely, normal olfactory function can be declared with high probability with a score of 3 in the Q-Sticks test. CONCLUSION: We reconfirmed that the Q-Sticks test is a good screening tool for everyday medical practice and in laboratory settings, although it has to be kept in mind that the test can produce false-negative results at a score of 3. The test was relatively sensitive to anosmia and differences between normosmic and hyposmic/anosmic patients.
OBJECTIVES: Classical, longer olfactory tests are associated with difficulties in everyday practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical utility of the Q-Sticks test within the context of a multicenter study. METHODS: A total of 333 subjects, aged between 12 and 88 years, completed a 3-item Q-Sticks test and a longer Sniffin' Sticks identification test. We analyzed the sensitivity and specificity of the test results for different cutoffs for anosmia and hyposmia. RESULTS: Our study showed that the test can be used on subjects aged 12 years and older, regardless of their sex. The data indicated a test sensitivity and specificity of 91.8 and 92%, respectively, with a score of 2 taken as a cutoff for olfactory dysfunction. Conversely, normal olfactory function can be declared with high probability with a score of 3 in the Q-Sticks test. CONCLUSION: We reconfirmed that the Q-Sticks test is a good screening tool for everyday medical practice and in laboratory settings, although it has to be kept in mind that the test can produce false-negative results at a score of 3. The test was relatively sensitive to anosmia and differences between normosmic and hyposmic/anosmic patients.