Cargando…
Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks”
BACKGROUND: A precise and reliable test of the olfactory function is indispensable for the diagnosis of the olfactory disorder (OD). Despite of this, in a clinical context, often there is no place in daily routine for time-consuming procedures. This study aimed to examine if the assessment of olfact...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10313570/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36799976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-07872-7 |
_version_ | 1785067154961334272 |
---|---|
author | Mai, Yiling Klockow, Marie Haehner, Antje Hummel, Thomas |
author_facet | Mai, Yiling Klockow, Marie Haehner, Antje Hummel, Thomas |
author_sort | Mai, Yiling |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A precise and reliable test of the olfactory function is indispensable for the diagnosis of the olfactory disorder (OD). Despite of this, in a clinical context, often there is no place in daily routine for time-consuming procedures. This study aimed to examine if the assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” is suitable for self-assessment. METHODS: Participants comprised 84 healthy control subjects (HC) and 37 OD patients. The “Sniffin’ Sticks” test battery consisting of odor threshold (T), discrimination (D) and identification (I) tests was used for self- and assisted assessments. To save time, we applied the 8-item wide step version of the T test and the 8-item D test, whereas the I task remained the same as the original version. The whole test included two sessions, with each session comprising a self-assessment part performed by the participants themselves, and an assisted-assessment part performed by the examiner. RESULTS: Sniffin’ Sticks self-assessment was efficient in distinguishing between self-reported HC subjects and OD patients (p’s < 0.01), and the scores did not differ significantly from the assisted-assessment (p’s > 0.05). In the self-administered I and TDI tests, there was a moderate to excellent test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.51–0.93, p’s < 0.01), and a strong to excellent correlation with the assisted assessment (r = 0.71–0.92, p’s < 0.01). However, the self-administered T and D tests only exhibited low to moderate test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.30–0.72, p’s < 0.05) and correlations with the assisted test (r = 0.31–0.62, p’s < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Identification self-test is appropriate to be solely applied, and is therefore an easy-to-use alternative for olfactory screening in a larger segment of patients. The whole “Sniffin’ Sticks” self-test also shows good measurement properties and is therefore a suitable backup in clinical practice, but improvement is needed due to the simplified D and T self-test. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10313570 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103135702023-07-02 Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” Mai, Yiling Klockow, Marie Haehner, Antje Hummel, Thomas Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Rhinology BACKGROUND: A precise and reliable test of the olfactory function is indispensable for the diagnosis of the olfactory disorder (OD). Despite of this, in a clinical context, often there is no place in daily routine for time-consuming procedures. This study aimed to examine if the assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” is suitable for self-assessment. METHODS: Participants comprised 84 healthy control subjects (HC) and 37 OD patients. The “Sniffin’ Sticks” test battery consisting of odor threshold (T), discrimination (D) and identification (I) tests was used for self- and assisted assessments. To save time, we applied the 8-item wide step version of the T test and the 8-item D test, whereas the I task remained the same as the original version. The whole test included two sessions, with each session comprising a self-assessment part performed by the participants themselves, and an assisted-assessment part performed by the examiner. RESULTS: Sniffin’ Sticks self-assessment was efficient in distinguishing between self-reported HC subjects and OD patients (p’s < 0.01), and the scores did not differ significantly from the assisted-assessment (p’s > 0.05). In the self-administered I and TDI tests, there was a moderate to excellent test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.51–0.93, p’s < 0.01), and a strong to excellent correlation with the assisted assessment (r = 0.71–0.92, p’s < 0.01). However, the self-administered T and D tests only exhibited low to moderate test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.30–0.72, p’s < 0.05) and correlations with the assisted test (r = 0.31–0.62, p’s < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Identification self-test is appropriate to be solely applied, and is therefore an easy-to-use alternative for olfactory screening in a larger segment of patients. The whole “Sniffin’ Sticks” self-test also shows good measurement properties and is therefore a suitable backup in clinical practice, but improvement is needed due to the simplified D and T self-test. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-02-17 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10313570/ /pubmed/36799976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-07872-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Rhinology Mai, Yiling Klockow, Marie Haehner, Antje Hummel, Thomas Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” |
title | Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” |
title_full | Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” |
title_fullStr | Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” |
title_full_unstemmed | Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” |
title_short | Self-assessment of olfactory function using the “Sniffin’ Sticks” |
title_sort | self-assessment of olfactory function using the “sniffin’ sticks” |
topic | Rhinology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10313570/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36799976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-07872-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT maiyiling selfassessmentofolfactoryfunctionusingthesniffinsticks AT klockowmarie selfassessmentofolfactoryfunctionusingthesniffinsticks AT haehnerantje selfassessmentofolfactoryfunctionusingthesniffinsticks AT hummelthomas selfassessmentofolfactoryfunctionusingthesniffinsticks |