BACKGROUND: Quantitative olfactory testing is essential to determine the validity and nature of a patient's complaint, accurately monitor changes in function over time (including influences of pharmacological, surgical, or immunological interventions), detect malingering, and establish disability compensation. This work describes the clinical validation of an advanced rapid odor detection threshold test that standardizes odorant delivery and eliminates unsanitary sniff bottles, the need for blindfolds, and the possibility of touching an odorant stimulus to the nose. METHODS: Snap & Sniff® single-staircase phenyl ethyl alcohol detection thresholds (S&S-Ts) were assessed bilaterally in 736 patients with chemosensory complaints; 421 received both bilateral and unilateral testing. The results were correlated with scores from the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and the Smell Threshold Test (STT), a widely-used standardized threshold test. Test-retest reliability data were obtained for 50 patients. RESULTS: S&S-Ts were highly reliable (Spearman r = 0.84), correlated with the other olfactory test measures (rs > 0.65, ps < 0.0001), and required significantly shorter administration times than the STT (<10 minutes). Bilateral thresholds were systematically lower than unilateral thresholds, a phenomenon independent of presentation order but dependent upon the better functioning side of the nose. The S&S-Ts were sensitive to age and sex. No systematic left:right nasal side threshold differences were evident. CONCLUSION: The present study validates the use of Snap & Sniff® technology in the clinic setting. High test-retest reliability and brief administration times were evident. The S&S-T test allows for a reliable, valid, inexpensive, and rapid clinical means for quantitatively assessing human olfactory sensitivity.
BACKGROUND: Quantitative olfactory testing is essential to determine the validity and nature of a patient's complaint, accurately monitor changes in function over time (including influences of pharmacological, surgical, or immunological interventions), detect malingering, and establish disability compensation. This work describes the clinical validation of an advanced rapid odor detection threshold test that standardizes odorant delivery and eliminates unsanitary sniff bottles, the need for blindfolds, and the possibility of touching an odorant stimulus to the nose. METHODS: Snap & Sniff® single-staircase phenyl ethyl alcohol detection thresholds (S&S-Ts) were assessed bilaterally in 736 patients with chemosensory complaints; 421 received both bilateral and unilateral testing. The results were correlated with scores from the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and the Smell Threshold Test (STT), a widely-used standardized threshold test. Test-retest reliability data were obtained for 50 patients. RESULTS: S&S-Ts were highly reliable (Spearman r = 0.84), correlated with the other olfactory test measures (rs > 0.65, ps < 0.0001), and required significantly shorter administration times than the STT (<10 minutes). Bilateral thresholds were systematically lower than unilateral thresholds, a phenomenon independent of presentation order but dependent upon the better functioning side of the nose. The S&S-Ts were sensitive to age and sex. No systematic left:right nasal side threshold differences were evident. CONCLUSION: The present study validates the use of Snap & Sniff® technology in the clinic setting. High test-retest reliability and brief administration times were evident. The S&S-T test allows for a reliable, valid, inexpensive, and rapid clinical means for quantitatively assessing human olfactory sensitivity.
Authors: Joel D Mainland; Linda A Barlow; Steven D Munger; Sarah E Millar; M Natalia Vergara; Peihua Jiang; James E Schwob; Bradley J Goldstein; Shannon E Boye; Jeffrey R Martens; Donald A Leopold; Linda M Bartoshuk; Richard L Doty; Thomas Hummel; Jayant M Pinto; Casey Trimmer; Christine Kelly; Edmund A Pribitkin; Danielle R Reed Journal: Chem Senses Date: 2020-10-09 Impact factor: 3.160
Authors: Joel James; Ilan C Palte; Brandon J Vilarello; Lucas G Axiotakis; Patricia T Jacobson; David A Gudis; Jonathan B Overdevest Journal: Front Allergy Date: 2022-08-31
Authors: Alessandro Iannaccone; Carmen C Brewer; Peiyao Cheng; Jacque L Duncan; Maureen G Maguire; Isabelle Audo; Allison R Ayala; Paul S Bernstein; Gavin M Bidelman; Janet K Cheetham; Richard L Doty; Todd A Durham; Robert B Hufnagel; Mark H Myers; Katarina Stingl; Wadih M Zein Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2021-07-30 Impact factor: 2.578
Authors: Shima T Moein; Seyed MohammadReza Hashemian; Babak Mansourafshar; Ali Khorram-Tousi; Payam Tabarsi; Richard L Doty Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 5.426