4.1 Article

Olfactory recovery following omicron variant infection: a psychophysical prospective case-control study with six-month follow up

期刊

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0022215123000877

关键词

Anosmia; ageusia; Covid-19; smell; SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus; taste; otolaryngology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to evaluate the recovery of olfactory function in individuals infected with the omicron variant of the coronavirus disease 2019. The results showed that while some patients experienced smell loss at the early stage of infection, there was no significant difference in recovery compared to the control group at six months.
Objective. This study aimed to evaluate the recovery of olfactory function at six months in individuals infected with the coronavirus disease 2019 omicron variant, using psychophysical tests.Methods. A prospective case-control study that included severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 patients infected in February and March 2022 was conducted. Patients underwent the Sniffin' Sticks test within 10 days of infection and again after at least 6 months. The olfactory scores were compared with those of a control group.Results. In all, 102 patients and 120 controls were enrolled in the study. At baseline, 26 patients (25.5 per cent) self-reported smell loss. The median threshold, discrimination and identification score was 33.6 (interquartile range, 12.5) for the cases and 36.5 (interquartile range, 4.38) for the controls (p < 0.001). Based on the threshold, discrimination and identification scores, 12 controls and 34 patients reported olfactory dysfunction (p < 0.001). Eighty cases underwent re-evaluation at six months; the median threshold, discrimination and identification score was 37.1 (interquartile range, 4.75) with no significant differences compared with the controls.Conclusion. Six months after infection, the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in patients did not differ significantly from the control population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据