China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Chemosensory Disorders and Nutrition
Published in Alan R. Hirsch, Nutrition and Sensation, 2023
Carl M. Wahlstrom, Alan R. Hirsch, Bradley W. Whitman
All subjects underwent baseline olfactory tests: the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) (Doty, Newhouse, and Azzalina 1985), a 40-item forced-choice, scratch-and-sniff identification test, the Chicago Smell Test (Hirsch and Cain 1992; Hirsch and Gotway 1993), a three odorant detection and identification test, and Amoore’s odor threshold tests (Amoore and Ollman 1983) for tetrahydrothiophene (thiophane) unilateral, and bilateral tests for 13 standard odorants at 25 decismels (ds), a normally detectable level. (The decismel scale of odor level is modeled after the decibel scale of sound levels.)
Faked Pain and Loss of Sensation
Published in Harold V. Hall, Joseph G. Poirier, Detecting Malingering and Deception, 2020
Harold V. Hall, Joseph G. Poirier
As part of the standard CNE, positive signs that indicate cranial nerve 1 (olfaction) dysfunction are commonly held in medicine to reflect frontal lobe disorders due to the intertwining of primary olfactory structures to the ventral-medial lobes and limbic circuits (Sanders & Gillig, 2010). They note that common conditions resulting in olfactory deficits include normal aging starting for both sexes around 60–65 years of age, cigarette smoking, alcohol abuse, traumatic brain injury (TBI), depression, and rhinitis/sinusitis. Precise identification of severe olfactory deficits is, in turn, significant for both Lewy body dementia and Parkinson’s disease. Sanders and Gillig (2010) recommend a highly reliable and valid measure, the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (Doty, Frye, & Agrawal, 1985). The Smelling Identification Test, reviewed elsewhere in this book, is not commonly used in the CNE.
Chemosensory Malingering
Published in Alan R. Hirsch, Neurological Malingering, 2018
A common method of formally measuring olfactory ability is the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) (Doty, 1995b), a series of 40 scratch-and-sniff forced-choice odor identification questions. This is the only test of olfaction that provides specific guidelines with published scores purporting to delineate the categories of true deficits and malingering.
Smell tests to distinguish Parkinson’s disease from other neurological disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 2021
Cintia C. G. Alonso, Fernanda G. Silva, Leonardo O. P. Costa, Sandra M. S. F. Freitas
Six tests for smell assessment were identified: the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT, n = 15) [17,18,22,24,27–30,32,35–37,47–49]; Odor Stick Identification Test (OSIT, n = 6) [19,34,38,44,45,50]; Brief Smell Identification Test (B-SIT) also called Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test (CC-SIT, n = 3) [21,40,41]; Sniffin’ Sticks test (SS) with three versions SS-12 (n = 3) [33,42,43], SS-16 (n = 3) [20,43,46] and SS-48 (n = 4) [23,25,31,39]; The Barcelona smell identification test (n = 1) [26]; and Open Essence (n = 1) [51]. Only the Barcelona smell identification test does not present a final score [26]. The tests scores of eight studies [22–24,28–31,48] were extracted from the graphs. Corresponding authors from two studies [19,48] were contacted to request the olfactory score data, but only one author replied with the values [19]. Means and standard deviations of the smell tests of two studies [18,29] were calculated from confidence intervals or standard errors presented in the articles.
Neurological manifestations in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in Brain Injury, 2020
Tzy Harn Chua, Zheyu Xu, Nicolas Kon Kam King
In our pooled analysis, olfactory dysfunction was a common complaint in COVID-19. However, most existing studies have ascertained olfactory dysfunction only through questionnaires rather than using more objective measures of smell, such as the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT). Further large-scale studies using objective measures of olfactory function will be necessary to clarify the nature and severity of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19. Anosmia had also been reported in SARS-CoV (67), with animal studies demonstrating that the SARS-CoV virus enters the brain primarily via the olfactory bulb (66). In COVID-19, the ACE2 receptor has been implicated in virus entry into neurological tissue (63,68) with entry of COVID-19 virus via the cribriform plate close to the olfactory bulb suggested as a possible mechanism (68). As such, invasion of COVID-19 near or in the olfactory bulb may potentially be linked to the development of anosmia in these patients.
Olfactory outcomes after transsphenoidal endonasal surgery
Published in British Journal of Neurosurgery, 2020
Irene Baudracco, Jinendra Ekanayake, Elinor Warner, Joan P. Grieve, Neil L. Dorward
This study prospectively compared the olfactory outcome of a small cohort of patients that underwent either microscopic or endoscopic transnasal transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas. All surgical procedures were performed in the same institution and during the same time frame. The aim was to assess the incidence of olfactory disturbances with a well-validated, accurate tool in a group of patients with the same pathological condition. Outcomes were objectively examined using the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (Sensonics Inc.) British Version.