Search

Among those many individuals who experience a reduced odor sensitivity (hyposmia/anosmia), some individuals also have disorders that lead to odor distortion, such as parosmia (i.e. distorted odor with a known source), or odor phantoms (i.e. odor sensation without an odor source). We surveyed a large population with at least one olfactory disorder (N = 2031) and found that odor distortions were common (46%), with respondents reporting either parosmia (19%), phantosmia (11%), or both (16%). In comparison to respondents with hyposmia or anosmia, respondents with parosmia were more likely to be female, young, and suffering from post-viral olfactory loss (P < 0.001), while respondents with phantosmia were more likely to be middle-aged (P < 0.01) and experiencing symptoms caused by head trauma (P < 0.01). In addition, parosmia, compared to phantosmia or anosmia/hyposmia, was most prevalent 3 months to a year after olfactory symptom onset (P < 0.001), which coincides with the timeline of physiological recovery. Finally, we observed that the frequency and duration of distortions negatively affects the quality of life, with parosmia showing a higher range of severity than phantosmia (P < 0.001). Previous research often grouped these distortions together, but our results show that they have distinct patterns of demographics, medical history, and loss in quality of life.

Olfactory research in humans has largely focused on odors perceived via sniffing, orthonasal olfaction, whereas odors perceived from the mouth, retronasal olfaction, are less well understood. Prior work on retronasally presented odors involves animal models and focus mainly on odor sensitivity, but little is known about retronasal olfactory perception and cognition in humans. In this study, we compared orthonasal and retronasal odor presentation routes to investigate differences in odor descriptions and evaluations. Thirty-six individuals participated in a within-subjects study using twelve odors (varying in pleasantness and edibility) in perceptual and semantic tasks. Orthonasal presentation was associated with a better ability to identify odors, and with more concrete (and source-based) language. Exploratory analyses revealed that whereas orthonasal odors were described with words that had visual associations, retronasal odors were described with words that had interoceptive associations. Interestingly, these route-dependent differences in descriptor usage were not explained by differences in sensitivity and intensity, suggesting instead a cognitive and linguistic processing difference between odors presented orthonasally and retronasally. Our results indicate that olfaction is, in fact, a dual sense, in which the routes change the perception of an odor.

Sniffin' Sticks have become a popular procedure to measure overall olfactory functionality with 3 subtest: phenyl ethyl alcohol threshold test (T), discrimination (D), and identification (I). However, several procedural components specified by the original paper have not been tested nor has the impact of deviations been measured. The aim of the present work was to measure olfactory performance under modified testing procedures. First, the reverse order of subtests (IDT) was compared with more standard practices (TDI). Next, the possible impact of background noise and positive concurrent feedback were assessed. A total of 120 individuals participated in the study where the 3 conditional experiments, each involving 40 participants, were completed. Testing procedures that reversed the presentation order of subtests (I->D->T) scored a significantly lower overall TDI score than standard testing order with the threshold subtest being the most influenced. Additionally, nonverbal background noise lowered overall olfactory performance while concurrent feedback modulated threshold performance. These results emphasize the importance of testing parameters where olfactory perception and tasks may be modulated by adaptation and attentional distraction, respectively. This study helped furthermore to demonstrate that the investigated 3 deviations from the standard procedure revealed a significant impact on the performance outcome in olfactory assessment using the Sniffin' Sticks.