Carl Philpott1,2,3, Joanne Dixon3, Duncan Boak3. 1. The Norfolk Smell & Taste Clinic, James Paget University Hospital, Gorleston, UK. 2. Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. 3. Fifth Sense, Barrow-on-Furness, Cumbria, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Qualitative olfactory disorders in the form of parosmia and phantosmia are very subjective and cannot be measured at present. They pose an unpleasant experience for patients and a therapeutic challenge for clinicians. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterise the specific experiences of patients affected by the qualitative symptoms of parosmia and phantosmia including both triggers for symptoms and self-help measures they have tried. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey questionnaire was developed with the input of patient experts within the charity Fifth Sense. The survey was then open online for 3 months to charity members complaining of qualitative symptoms. The survey captured the frequency and impact of symptoms and self-management undertaken. Reflective feedback was also captured from a patient workshop. RESULTS: There were 100 participants; 61% female, age range 13-88. Common self-reported aetiology included sinonasal disease (17%), idiopathic (33%) and post-viral olfactory loss (26%) and post-traumatic olfactory loss (23%). Parosmia was reported as a daily symptom in 67% compared to 31% for phantosmia; 36% complained of suffering with both symptoms. Only 4% of respondents reported having received any successful treatment for their qualitative symptoms and 58% reported having received no treatment whatsoever. Olfactory training was the most common self-management method reported. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates that qualitative disturbances remain problematic for those who experience them due to the duration of symptoms, the relative lack of experience or knowledge amongst medical professionals and the lack of therapeutic options. In future, consideration needs to be given to adaptation and coping strategies to help patients deal with these symptoms.
BACKGROUND: Qualitative olfactory disorders in the form of parosmia and phantosmia are very subjective and cannot be measured at present. They pose an unpleasant experience for patients and a therapeutic challenge for clinicians. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterise the specific experiences of patients affected by the qualitative symptoms of parosmia and phantosmia including both triggers for symptoms and self-help measures they have tried. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey questionnaire was developed with the input of patient experts within the charity Fifth Sense. The survey was then open online for 3 months to charity members complaining of qualitative symptoms. The survey captured the frequency and impact of symptoms and self-management undertaken. Reflective feedback was also captured from a patient workshop. RESULTS: There were 100 participants; 61% female, age range 13-88. Common self-reported aetiology included sinonasal disease (17%), idiopathic (33%) and post-viral olfactory loss (26%) and post-traumatic olfactory loss (23%). Parosmia was reported as a daily symptom in 67% compared to 31% for phantosmia; 36% complained of suffering with both symptoms. Only 4% of respondents reported having received any successful treatment for their qualitative symptoms and 58% reported having received no treatment whatsoever. Olfactory training was the most common self-management method reported. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates that qualitative disturbances remain problematic for those who experience them due to the duration of symptoms, the relative lack of experience or knowledge amongst medical professionals and the lack of therapeutic options. In future, consideration needs to be given to adaptation and coping strategies to help patients deal with these symptoms.
Whilst we are now witnessing the rise of sudden onset anosmia as a marker of
Covid-19 coronavirus infection,[1-7] it may serve to remind us
that at least an estimated 5% of the population[8] are affected by olfactory dysfunction. These disorders can be both
quantitative and qualitative in nature. Common causes of olfactory disorders
include chronic rhinosinusitis, post-infectious olfactory dysfunction and
post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction[9] with neurological diseases such as Parkinson’s sometimes culpable, but
with about 10% of all cases in the community appearing to be idiopathic in
nature. Amongst those cases typically common in specialist clinics are
post-infectious and idiopathic cases.[10] The qualitative aspects of olfactory disorders in the form of parosmia
and phantosmia are however less well publicised.[11]Fifth Sense, the UK charity for people affected by smell and taste disorders, was
founded in 2012 and working together with patients our previous work has been
able to demonstrate the very significant impact of olfactory disorders on those
affected.[12,13] Whilst recent findings show that qualitative disorders
may have a positive prognostic significance for the recovery of olfactory disorders[14] they do however present a particular source of distress to those affected
whilst present. Previous studies of patients presenting with olfactory
dysfunction have shown that parosmia was present in 34% and phantosmia present
in 12% of patients presenting to a clinical setting.[15] In some of our earlier work, 2 years after the inception of our charity,
our membership reported parosmia in 19% and phantosmia in 24% of cases.[12]Even more so than quantitative olfactory loss, qualitative disturbances provide a
source of frustration for both the patient and the clinician. Evidence for
prescribed treatment for qualitative disorders was limited to 7 studies in a
previous systematic review for phantosmia[16] and evidence for self-help measures appears to be very limited.[17] Some patients are so severely affected that consideration has been given
to surgical removal of the olfactory epithelium.[18]
Objectives
This study aimed to characterise the specific experiences of olfactory disorder
patients affected by the qualitative symptoms of parosmia and phantosmia
including both triggers for symptoms and self-help measures they have tried.
Materials and Methods
Study Design
The study was designed as a cross-sectional survey of the personal experience of
people affected by qualitative olfactory disorders in living with and managing
these symptoms. A survey questionnaire was developed using a clinician-expert
patient partnership. The survey ran online and was available for a period of
6 months. It was promoted via social media internationally using the Fifth Sense
links. One of our charity’s volunteers (JD) also provided a personal account of
her experience of parosmia as well as inviting comments from her local support
group in Newcastle.
Setting and Participants
The survey was open to anyone globally with access to the world wide web and
declaring themselves as someone affected by the symptoms of parosmia and
phantosmia, regardless of the aetiology. Survey participants were able to access
the survey themselves free of charge via the web-based platform SurveyMonkey.
Participants were self-selecting and could participate from any country
internationally.
Data Sources/Management and Variables
The survey asked for basic demographics including age and sex. The terms parosmia
and phantosmia were then defined. Participants were asked to declare the
underlying cause for their smell loss. Further questions explored the timing,
intensity, frequency and impact of qualitative symptoms along with any triggers
and self-management undertaken.
Bias
We aimed to reduce bias in responses by making the survey widely available and it
reflects the membership base of charity which is both in the UK population and
in other countries. Although patients will be self-selecting in completing this
survey, they will represent the patients likely to present to clinicians with
qualitative disorders and this survey designed to estimate prevalence or comment on the relative frequency of
qualitative symptoms amongst those with olfactory disorders or the community at
large. We do not believe any lack of direct clinician involvement or
psychophysical testing detracts from the findings herein.
Study Size and Statistical Methods
As this was an exploratory study to capture patient experiences, no sample size
was set. Due to the nature of the study, descriptive statistics only have been
utilised in reporting the survey data.
Results
Participants
A total of 100 participants recorded information on the survey during the study
period. The number of “non-respondents” is unknown.
Descriptive Data
Of the 100 participants, 61 were female and 39 were male. The age of participants
ranged from 13 to 88, with a mean age of 51. The aetiology reported for
participants included 33% reporting idiopathic olfactory loss (IOL), 17% chronic
rhinosinusitis (CRS), 23% post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction (PTOD) and 26%
post-infectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) and 5% iatrogenic; 4 patients
reported both PIOD and CRS are included within the above percentages. The range
of duration of reported qualitative olfactory disorders was 1 month to 40 years
with a mean of 7 years. Eighty percent of respondents reported experiencing
parosmia whilst 65% reported phantomsia; 36% of patients reported experiencing
both symptoms.
Main Results
Frequency and impact of symptoms
Symptoms of parosmia were reported as occurring more frequently (Table 1), with it
being reported as a daily symptom in 67% compared to 31% for phantosmia
(Table 2)
with an associated higher quality of life impact. The onset of their
qualitative symptoms was reported as being sudden in 65%. Parosmia was more
likely to be constant (64%) than phantosmia, which was reported as
fluctuating in 59%.
Table 1.
Responses to Question on Parosmia Impact (n/%).
Is your parosmia…
YES
NO
Not Applicable
A daily occurrence?
67
9
24
Intense?
44
27
29
Having an impact on your enjoyment of every day
62
13
25
Is causing you to (or has done) lose weight?
21
51
28
Table 2.
Responses to Question on Phantosmia Impact (n/%).
Is Your Phantosmia…
YES
NO
Not Applicable
A daily occurrence?
31
31
38
Intense?
33
25
42
Having an impact on your enjoyment of every day
32
29
39
Is causing you to (or has done) lose weight?
10
47
43
Responses to Question on Parosmia Impact (n/%).Responses to Question on Phantosmia Impact (n/%).
Self-management of symptoms
Only 4% of respondents reported having received any successful treatment for
their qualitative symptoms and 58% reported having received no treatment
whatsoever. In those 4 cases where treatment was reported as being
successful, 1 had received oral steroids, 1 haloperidol, 1 a polypectomy and
1 acupuncture. There were several comments about topical steroids not
helping. Stimulating the nose with other smells (olfactory training) was the
most common self-management method (Table 3). Several reported the use
of nasal douching, but other options left in the comments included blocking
nasal passages with tissue or nasal plugs, using dried eucalyptus leaves in
boiling water and inhaling the steam and drinking the tea inhaling the
steam, thyme and lavender and castor oil drops in the nose.
Table 3.
Self-Help Measures Tried by Participants.
Measure Tried
Participants (%)
Valsalva manoeuvre (closing one's mouth, pinching one's
nose shut while pressing out as if blowing up a
balloon)
33
Head movements
20
Stimulating the nose with other smells (olfactory
training)
67
Stimulating the nose with water (nasal
douching/rinsing)
39
Stimulating the nose with deep breaths in through the
nose
53
Stimulating the nose with menthol/mustard/pepper
spray
33
Self-Help Measures Tried by Participants.Comments on stimuli included variations between random and constant nature in
those with phantosmia, with reports of specific stimuli including increased
rhinitis symptoms, cooking smells, emotional or tense situations, humidity
and temperature changes, exercise, memories, visual cues, eating and
fatigue; key non-olfactory stimulants are listed in Table 4.
Table 4.
Non-Olfactory Stimulants That Provoke Symptoms.
Stimulant
Participants (%)
Flushing the nose
2
Pungent smells (trigeminal effect)
17
Sneezing
15
Changes in air pressure
25
Air travel
3
Physical exercise
5
Non-Olfactory Stimulants That Provoke Symptoms.
Personal account
Having suffered an extremely bad cold in 2015 (aged 44) I was unaware of the
putrid bad smell and taste that was soon to follow and consume my daily life.
Over the coming weeks this foul smell became so overpowering that sleep was my
only escape. I started to notice certain smells i.e. coffee, petrol, smoke,
cooked food, perfume, fabric softener intensified the smell of rotten flesh and
sewage twentyfold. Washing clothes, using soap, deodorant and shampoo were all
revolting and using toothpaste would make me retch. It took over my life and
affected my work and personal life in such a way that I was off work for
3 months and avoided being around my partner, going out or seeing friends and
family. This bad smell was constant even when there were no other odours
present. The only place I could stop the smell from intensifying was at home by
avoiding certain triggers as mentioned above.I saw my GP over several months who prescribed a variety of medication none of
which worked. To my amazement one GP suggested I stand on my head to clear my
sinuses. My nostrils became very dry and crusts developed alongside nose bleeds.
Eventually I came across a local ENT consultant in the region who took an
interest in these conditions and my GP made an appointment for me, but this
would not be for another 6 months. Having explored so much medication without
success I became so desperate that I arranged to see this consultant privately
and was seen within days. Unfortunately, they confirmed that I was suffering
from parosmia but could not tell me if I would regain my smell and taste and
there was nothing more that could be done. At that point I became hysterical and
totally broke down - he recommended I speak to my GP about antidepressants. I
left his office distraught and feeling my life was over – I could not bear this
constant repulsive smell and taste any longer. Thankfully a couple of days later
my consultant called who’d spoke with a colleague and recommended I be
prescribed with Theophylline. He explained there was no evidence to prove it
would be successful as it was a trial drug which was used for asthma patients.
After 1-2 weeks of taking this medication I found it had suppressed the bad
smell to a degree where I could manage. I also noticed that mucus returned in my
nose as things slowly started to improve but by this time I had a perforated
septum by blowing my nose so hard and dislodging the crusting in order to help
breathe. Having read about a case in the US regarding Gabapentin I decided to
ask my GP if I could also be prescribed this medication and over time I felt
that this helped improve my taste.Parosmia is a dreadful condition which seriously impacted my mental health and
quality of life. However, some people do recover – I have! It may have taken
5 years, but I can say I have 85% of my normal smell and taste back. Having
spoken to other people with the same condition it is awful to hear that some GPs
and Consultants are uninterested and clinical in telling patients “If your smell
doesn't return after 6 months then it's not likely to.” In my experience
GPs/Consultants should be supportive and monitor and measure their patients’
progress. They should be made aware of specific medication that can potentially
aid recovery and save on cost spent on medication that will have no effect.
There should also be more research done on trial drugs.I fully understand that the medical profession is unable to prove that a patient
can recover from parosmia but equally there aren't any statistics to say that a
patient won't recover either. Therefore, taking an interest and having a
positive approach will support patients on their potential journey to recovery
or at least give them time to slowly adapt and find coping mechanisms.
Feedback From Fifth Sense Newcastle Hub Members
Depression/anxiety when living alone, afraid to go out with friends
for fear of eating something that suddenly causes a serious chemical
taste/smell and I have to leave. The taste e.g. dressings with
vinegar - lemon juice. Loss of joy of smelling cut grass, sea,
flowers, personal contact. Life is so bland - feel alien.It is depressing that I might have to suffer with this for the rest
of my life. My GP tells me that considering the health problems of
most of his 75-year-old patients my problem is minor. I know it’s
not life threatening but it does seriously affect my quality of
life.My consultant seemed spectacularly uninterested and spent just a few
minutes with a cursory examination to then tell me that there was
'no hope' for me! Crushed, I all but gave up, and was then assaulted
by a further issue where my no-taste was largely replaced with an
unpleasant sensation/taste for most foods.I can't live with this condition - having this foul smell and taste
every second of the day is just unbearable.The condition manifests itself for me by fairly extreme and
unpleasant smells/tastes - somewhat akin to the sharp, sour smell of
vomit - for several types of foods (coffee, beef, eggs, broccoli
etc) - but all those different foodstuffs have the SAME unpleasant
odour!! Weird in the extreme! And….occasionally, things I could
tolerate before, I suddenly become unable to? And, yes, like the
leaflet indicates, I feel that I was “better off” when I couldn't
smell or taste anything!
Discussion
Key Results
Qualitative olfactory disorders can have a significant impact on patients and
given the mean duration of symptoms in this cohort was 7 years, indicates the
effects may be long-lasting in some of those affected. A lack of either
treatment or of effective treatment was evident in 96% of respondents. The
combination of these two factors reveals a group of patients with a poor quality
of life and the potential for adverse mental health. Many triggers exist but
whilst external odours do stimulate symptoms, they are also a means for patients
to try to moderate their symptoms.
Limitations
The survey will not have been seen by those who are not online or do not have
access to the aforementioned social media. This is likely to have
disproportionately affected the older generations. The charity membership and
survey respondents will also tend to be more likely to be those who have more
persistent symptoms and perhaps are more resistant cases. The diagnoses were
self-reported, and no physical examination or psychophysical olfactory testing
was conducted due to the nature of the study setting; of course, parosmia and
phantosmia cannot be measured. We believe the responses on the survey genuinely
reflect the experiences of our charity’s members, based on our previously
published work[12,13] and the feedback during our members conferences and workshops.[19] Furthermore, the respondents are likely to represent the patients who
have persistent and unresolved symptoms and seek help and advice from
clinicians, so discussing the absence of direct clinical assessment misses the
point of this study which about patients’ experiences in managing these
olfactory disorders.
Interpretation
The demographics and aetiology of study participants was in keeping with the
typical female predominance seen in other studies but interestingly with
idiopathic and CRS cases accounting for the aetiology of as many of the
respondents as PIOD and PTOD cases. Previous studies have reported the
prevalence of qualitative disorders as most frequent in patients with PIOD
(occurring in 56% of PIOD cases), with 28% in CRS, 14% in PTOD and 10% in
idiopathic cases.[15] Recovery of qualitative olfactory dysfunction in the study by Reden et al
was seen in 29% of those with parosmia after an average of 12 months and in 53%
of those with phantosmia. A previous systematic review of the management of
phantosmia specifically found a very small evidence base for prescribed
treatments that included antipsychotics, antiepileptics, anti-migrainous
medications and topical cocaine.[16] Clearly this group of patients have an unmet need in terms of effective
treatments, given that 38% of our participants reported unsuccessful treatment
and over half reported no treatment being given. Our case reported above is an
example of our experience that theophylline may be a useful therapeutic option
to consider but the risks and balances of using an off-licence medication need
to be discussed with the patient and more evidence is needed on its role in
olfactory disorders.[20] Gabapentin is also a therapeutic agent to consider but similarly needs
further corroboration.The mean duration of symptoms seen in our study was longer than otherwise
reported elsewhere[15,21] but may reflect the source of recruitment and therefore
encapsulating patients whose symptoms persist beyond their immediate clinical
contact. The main odorant triggers eliciting parosmia in a study by Pierre et al
included petrol, tobacco, coffee, perfumes, fruits and chocolate.[21] Our volunteers have encapsulated a range of experiences and demonstrate
that the experience of parosmia is very much an individual one.
Generalisability
Qualitative disturbances remain problematic for those who experience them due to
the duration of symptoms, the relative lack of interest from medical
professionals and the lack of therapeutic options for them. This has a
significant impact on their quality of life.[21] In future, consideration needs to be given to psychological and dietary
measures to enable patients to adapt and recover from these disabling
distortions, in some ways perhaps akin to tinnitus in the case of phantosmia.
There is certainly evidence of the need for more resources for these patients
both in terms of direct therapeutic options and indirect supportive options.
Authors: M Lechner; D Chandrasekharan; K Jumani; J Liu; S Gane; V J Lund; C Philpott; S Jayaraj Journal: Rhinology Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: David T Liu; Maha Sabha; Michael Damm; Carl Philpott; Anna Oleszkiewicz; Antje Hähner; Thomas Hummel Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2020-11-19 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Valentina Parma; Kathrin Ohla; Maria G Veldhuizen; Masha Y Niv; Christine E Kelly; Alyssa J Bakke; Keiland W Cooper; Cédric Bouysset; Nicola Pirastu; Michele Dibattista; Rishemjit Kaur; Marco Tullio Liuzza; Marta Y Pepino; Veronika Schöpf; Veronica Pereda-Loth; Shannon B Olsson; Richard C Gerkin; Paloma Rohlfs Domínguez; Javier Albayay; Michael C Farruggia; Surabhi Bhutani; Alexander W Fjaeldstad; Ritesh Kumar; Anna Menini; Moustafa Bensafi; Mari Sandell; Iordanis Konstantinidis; Antonella Di Pizio; Federica Genovese; Lina Öztürk; Thierry Thomas-Danguin; Johannes Frasnelli; Sanne Boesveldt; Özlem Saatci; Luis R Saraiva; Cailu Lin; Jérôme Golebiowski; Liang-Dar Hwang; Mehmet Hakan Ozdener; Maria Dolors Guàrdia; Christophe Laudamiel; Marina Ritchie; Jan Havlícek; Denis Pierron; Eugeni Roura; Marta Navarro; Alissa A Nolden; Juyun Lim; Katherine L Whitcroft; Lauren R Colquitt; Camille Ferdenzi; Evelyn V Brindha; Aytug Altundag; Alberto Macchi; Alexia Nunez-Parra; Zara M Patel; Sébastien Fiorucci; Carl M Philpott; Barry C Smith; Johan N Lundström; Carla Mucignat; Jane K Parker; Mirjam van den Brink; Michael Schmuker; Florian Ph S Fischmeister; Thomas Heinbockel; Vonnie D C Shields; Farhoud Faraji; Enrique Santamaría; William E A Fredborg; Gabriella Morini; Jonas K Olofsson; Maryam Jalessi; Noam Karni; Anna D'Errico; Rafieh Alizadeh; Robert Pellegrino; Pablo Meyer; Caroline Huart; Ben Chen; Graciela M Soler; Mohammed K Alwashahi; Antje Welge-Lüssen; Jessica Freiherr; Jasper H B de Groot; Hadar Klein; Masako Okamoto; Preet Bano Singh; Julien W Hsieh; Danielle R Reed; Thomas Hummel; Steven D Munger; John E Hayes Journal: Chem Senses Date: 2020-10-09 Impact factor: 3.160
Authors: Jerome R Lechien; Carlos M Chiesa-Estomba; Daniele R De Siati; Mihaela Horoi; Serge D Le Bon; Alexandra Rodriguez; Didier Dequanter; Serge Blecic; Fahd El Afia; Lea Distinguin; Younes Chekkoury-Idrissi; Stéphane Hans; Irene Lopez Delgado; Christian Calvo-Henriquez; Philippe Lavigne; Chiara Falanga; Maria Rosaria Barillari; Giovanni Cammaroto; Mohamad Khalife; Pierre Leich; Christel Souchay; Camelia Rossi; Fabrice Journe; Julien Hsieh; Myriam Edjlali; Robert Carlier; Laurence Ris; Andrea Lovato; Cosimo De Filippis; Frederique Coppee; Nicolas Fakhry; Tareck Ayad; Sven Saussez Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 2.503
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
Authors: Carol H Yan; Farhoud Faraji; Divya P Prajapati; Christine E Boone; Adam S DeConde Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 5.426