Invalid Self-Assessment of Olfactory Functioning in Parkinson's Disease Patients May Mislead the Neurologist.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Parkinson's Disease Pub Date : 2020-11-16 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2020/7548394
Nele Schmidt, Laura Paschen, Karsten Witt
{"title":"Invalid Self-Assessment of Olfactory Functioning in Parkinson's Disease Patients May Mislead the Neurologist.","authors":"Nele Schmidt,&nbsp;Laura Paschen,&nbsp;Karsten Witt","doi":"10.1155/2020/7548394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a prominent nonmotor symptom in Parkinson's disease (PD), and OD is a supportive diagnostic criterion for PD. Physicians often ask their patients if they have noticed a smell disorder. This study evaluates the diagnostic validity of OD self-assessment in PD. To this end, 64 PD patients and 33 age-matched healthy controls were enrolled in a study assessing subjective and objective olfactory functioning. To examine subjective olfactory abilities, first, patients and controls had to classify their olfactory sense as \"impaired\" or \"unimpaired,\" comparable to a realistic situation in an outpatient setting. Second, to evaluate subjective olfactory acuity, a visual analogue scale (VAS) was used. Third, the Sniffin' Sticks test battery was used as an objective instrument to diagnose OD. Categorical olfactory self-assessment predicts the classification normosmic versus hyposmic based on the global Sniffin' Sticks score (TDI) with a sensitivity of 0.79 and a specificity of 0.45. TDI correlated significantly with the VAS (<i>r</i> = 0.297, <i>p</i> = 0.017). The ROC curve analysis, using the VAS rating as a predictor for objective olfaction, revealed 42 as the best possible cutoff score with an area under the curve of 0.63. These results demonstrate that olfactory self-assessments show a low accuracy and are not suitable for the diagnosis of a smell disorder in PD. Objective measures are necessary to evaluate olfactory sense in clinical and research settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":19907,"journal":{"name":"Parkinson's Disease","volume":"2020 ","pages":"7548394"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2020/7548394","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parkinson's Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/7548394","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a prominent nonmotor symptom in Parkinson's disease (PD), and OD is a supportive diagnostic criterion for PD. Physicians often ask their patients if they have noticed a smell disorder. This study evaluates the diagnostic validity of OD self-assessment in PD. To this end, 64 PD patients and 33 age-matched healthy controls were enrolled in a study assessing subjective and objective olfactory functioning. To examine subjective olfactory abilities, first, patients and controls had to classify their olfactory sense as "impaired" or "unimpaired," comparable to a realistic situation in an outpatient setting. Second, to evaluate subjective olfactory acuity, a visual analogue scale (VAS) was used. Third, the Sniffin' Sticks test battery was used as an objective instrument to diagnose OD. Categorical olfactory self-assessment predicts the classification normosmic versus hyposmic based on the global Sniffin' Sticks score (TDI) with a sensitivity of 0.79 and a specificity of 0.45. TDI correlated significantly with the VAS (r = 0.297, p = 0.017). The ROC curve analysis, using the VAS rating as a predictor for objective olfaction, revealed 42 as the best possible cutoff score with an area under the curve of 0.63. These results demonstrate that olfactory self-assessments show a low accuracy and are not suitable for the diagnosis of a smell disorder in PD. Objective measures are necessary to evaluate olfactory sense in clinical and research settings.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
帕金森氏病患者嗅觉功能的无效自我评估可能会误导神经科医生。
嗅觉功能障碍(Olfactory dysfunction, OD)是帕金森病(PD)中一个突出的非运动症状,是帕金森病的支持性诊断标准。医生经常问他们的病人是否注意到嗅觉障碍。本研究评价OD自评对PD的诊断有效性。为此,64名PD患者和33名年龄匹配的健康对照者参加了一项评估主观和客观嗅觉功能的研究。为了检查主观嗅觉能力,首先,患者和对照组必须将他们的嗅觉分为“受损”或“未受损”,这与门诊环境中的现实情况相当。其次,采用视觉模拟评分法(visual analogue scale, VAS)评价主观嗅觉敏锐度。第三,将嗅探棒测试电池作为诊断OD的客观工具。分类嗅觉自我评估基于整体嗅探棒评分(TDI)预测分类正常与低低,敏感性为0.79,特异性为0.45。TDI与VAS显著相关(r = 0.297, p = 0.017)。ROC曲线分析,使用VAS评分作为客观嗅觉的预测因子,显示42是最佳可能的截止分数,曲线下面积为0.63。这些结果表明嗅觉自我评估的准确性较低,不适用于PD嗅觉障碍的诊断。客观的措施是必要的,以评估嗅觉在临床和研究设置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Parkinson's Disease
Parkinson's Disease CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
3.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: Parkinson’s Disease is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to the epidemiology, etiology, pathogenesis, genetics, cellular, molecular and neurophysiology, as well as the diagnosis and treatment of Parkinson’s disease.
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness and Feasibility of Nonpharmacological Interventions for People With Parkinson's Disease and Cognitive Impairment on Patient-Centred Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of King's Parkinson's Disease Pain Scale. A Cognitive-Behavioral Model of Apathy in Parkinson's Disease. Possible Implications of Managing Alexithymia on Quality of Life in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review. Implications of Convolutional Neural Network for Brain MRI Image Classification to Identify Alzheimer's Disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1