4.5 Article

Olfactory Dysfunction in COVID-19 Patients: Prevalence and Prognosis for Recovering Sense of Smell

Journal

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY
Volume 164, Issue 1, Pages 82-86

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1177/0194599820943530

Keywords

COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; pandemic; coronavirus; olfactory loss; smell disorders; olfaction; pneumonitis; pneumonia; hyposmia; olfaction; interstitial pneumonia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that olfactory dysfunction is more common in COVID-19 patients compared to healthy controls, with outpatients paradoxically reporting loss of smell more commonly than inpatients. Most patients with olfactory dysfunction recovered within 30 days, indicating a favorable prognosis.
While olfactory dysfunction associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has attracted considerable interest, few studies have tracked outcomes at serial time points or beyond 2 weeks. Furthermore, data are conflicting regarding whether COVID-19 severity correlates with degree of olfactory dysfunction. This prospective case-control study analyzed prevalence and severity of subjective loss of smell in outpatients (n = 23) and inpatients (n = 20) with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection vs healthy controls (n = 25). Olfactory dysfunction was reported more commonly in COVID-19 patients than in healthy controls (P< .001), and outpatients paradoxically reported loss of smell more commonly than inpatients (P= .02). Headaches were present in 52% of patients with olfactory dysfunction. Anosmia or hyposmia persisted beyond 5 days but most of the patients recovered by 30 days, suggesting favorable prognosis for olfaction. Differences between inpatients and outpatients are potentially reflective of timeline of olfactory symptoms and contextual factors, underscoring the importance of corroborative objective testing, coupled with careful tracking of temporal relationships.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available