Does Olfactory Training Improve Brain Function and Cognition? A Systematic Review.

Olfactory training (OT), or smell training,consists of repeated exposure to odorants over time with the intended neuroplastic effect of improving or remediating olfactory functioning. Declines in olfaction parallel declines in cognition in various pathological conditions and aging. Research suggests a dynamic neural connection exists between olfaction and cognition. Thus, if OT can improve olfaction, could OT also improve cognition and support brain function? To answer this question, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine whether there is evidence that OT translates to improved cognition or altered brain morphology and connectivity that supports cognition. Across three databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, & Embase), 18 articles were identified in this systematic review. Overall, the reviewed studies provided emerging evidence that OT is associated with improved global cognition, and in particular, verbal fluency and verbal learning/memory. OT is also associated with increases in the volume/size of olfactory-related brain regions, including the olfactory bulb and hippocampus, and altered functional connectivity. Interestingly, these positive effects were not limited to patients with smell loss (i.e., hyposmia & anosmia) but normosmic (i.e., normal ability to smell) participants benefitted as well. Implications for practice and research are provided.

Olfactory training with four and eight odors: comparison with clinical testing and olfactory bulb volumetrics.

PURPOSE: Post-infectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) is one of the most common causes of olfactory impairment but has limited treatment options. Recently, olfactory training (OT) has been considered an effective treatment method; however, several questions have arisen regarding its optimal scheme. The aim of this study was to assess whether an OT scheme with 8 odors is more effective than the classic OT scheme with 4 odors by comparing psychophysical test results and olfactory bulb (OB) volumetrics. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 72 patients with PIOD were included. The patients followed either the classic 4-odor OT scheme (COT; n = 34 patients) or an extended 8-odor scheme (EOT; n = 38 patients) for 16 weeks. All patients underwent olfactory testing with a Sniffin'Sticks battery test at 0, 8, and 16 weeks. Of the patients, 38 underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging for OB volumetric assessment before and after treatment. RESULTS: The comparison of the olfactory test results did not show any significant difference between the two study groups, in agreement with the OB volumetrics. The convex OB showed better test results than the non-convex OB, with significantly better improvement after treatment regardless of OT type. The EOT group presented significantly better adherence than the COT group. CONCLUSION: The number of odors did not appear to play a significant role in the effect of the OT. However, the training scheme with more than four odors showed better adherence among the patients in a long-term treatment plan. The shape of the OB may have prognostic value in clinical assessment and warrants further investigation.

The efficacy of olfactory training in improving olfactory function: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Study the efficacy of olfactory training in smell recovery. METHODS: An extensive search was performed through different databases in order to find articles analyzing the efficacy of olfactory training as a treatment for olfactory dysfunction. Methodological quality of primary studies within the final sample was assessed following PRISMA guidelines. Standardized mean differences in pre-post olfactory training groups, and also in experimental-control and pre-follow up if possible, were computed by Hedges' g effect size statistic. Each effect size was weighted by its inverse variance. RESULTS: Final sample was composed of 36 articles (45 pre-post effect sizes). Contrasts were performed separately for odor identification, odor discrimination, odor threshold and general olfactory function. Moderate to large and heterogeneous effect was obtained for olfactory function (g = 0.755, k = 45, SE = 0.093, CI 95% = [0.572, 0.937]), different moderators had a significant effects, such as, training duration, age and anosmia diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Olfactory training was found to have a positive and significant effect on rehabilitating the olfactory function.

Persistent COVID-19 parosmia and olfactory loss post olfactory training: randomized clinical trial comparing central and peripheral-acting therapeutics.

PURPOSE: Although COVID-19 anosmia is often transient, patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (pOD) can experience refractory parosmia and diminished smell. This study evaluated four putative therapies for parosmia in patients with chronic COVID-19 olfactory impairment. METHODS: After screening nasal endoscopy, 85 patients (49 female, 58%) with pOD and treatment-refractory parosmia were randomized to: (1) ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin + olfactory training (OT) (umPEALUT group, n = 17), (2) alpha-lipoic acid + OT (ALA group, n = 21), (3) umPEALUT + ALA + OT (combination group, n = 28), or 4) olfactory training (OT) alone (control group, n = 23). Olfactory function was assessed at baseline (T0) and 6 months (T1) using a parosmia questionnaire and Sniffin' Sticks test of odor threshold, detection, and identification (TDI). Analyses included one-way ANOVA for numeric data and Chi-Square analyses for nominal data on parosmia. RESULTS: The umPEALUT group had the largest improvement in TDI scores (21.8 ± 9.4 to 29.7 ± 7.5) followed by the combination group (19.6 ± 6.29 to 27.5 ± 2.7), both p < 0.01. The control and ALA groups had no significant change. Patients in the combination and umPEALUT groups had significantly improved TDI scores compared to ALA and control groups (p < 0.001). Rates of parosmia resolution after 6 months were reported at 96% for combination, 65% for control, 53% for umPEALUT and 29% for ALA (p < 0.001). All treatment regimens were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: umPEALUT and OT, with or without ALA, was associated with improvement in TDI scores and parosmia, whereas OT alone or OT with ALA were associated with little benefit.

Olfactory training in normosmic individuals: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Even if olfactory training (OT) is a well-established treatment for individuals with olfactory dysfunction, the effect on individuals with normosmia remains uncertain. In this randomised controlled trial, we explore how OT with different exposure lengths affect olfactory function in individuals with normosmia. METHODOLOGY: Two hundred normosmic individuals were randomly assigned to one of two intervention groups performing OT with different exposure lengths or to a control group. The OT groups did OT twice daily for three months, g four different odours (eucalyptus, lavender, mint, and lemon) for 10 seconds per bottle during either a total of 40 seconds (standard OT) or 4 minutes (extended OT), while the control group did not perform any OT. Olfactory function was assessed using a 48-item Sniffin Sticks test at baseline, after the intervention, and after one year. RESULTS: We found no significant effect of OT in either of the intervention groups on any aspect of olfaction after intervention or at follow-up. There was no association between sex, age, allergic rhinitis, education or olfactory scores at baseline, and changes in olfactory function after OT. The extended OT group performed significantly fewer training sessions compared to those in the standard OT group. CONCLUSIONS: OT had a limited effect on olfactory function in individuals with normosmia. Further, the superiority of a more extended OT is not supported by this study, and shorter training sessions seem to improve compliance with OT.

Treatment adherence to olfactory training: a real-world observational study.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory training (OT) is considered an effective intervention for most causes of smell loss and is recommended as a long-term treatment. However, the treatment adherence of OT remains unclear. This study aims to identify the frequency and causalities for lack of adherence to OT. METHODS: In this prospective study, 53 patients previously diagnosed with olfactory dysfunction (OD), who were recommended to perform OT, were enrolled. Patients underwent olfactory testing using Sniffin' Sticks for threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) and a subjective numeric rating scale (NRS) at a baseline and follow-up visit. In addition, patients answered a six-item treatment adherence questionnaire. The primary outcome measures were clinically relevant improvements according to the TDI (>=5.5) and NRS (>=5.5) scores. RESULTS: Out of 53 patients, 45 performed OT. Among patients who performed OT, 31% discontinued the use of OT on their own due to a self-perceived improvement, while 51% discontinued use due to lack of improvements in olfaction. In these patients, the average duration of OT use was five months. After controlling for baseline duration of OD, baseline TDI score and smell loss aetiologies, discontinuing OT due to a lack of self-perceived improvement remained significantly associated with worse TDI and NRS outcomes at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that therapeutical adherence to OT is low, regardless of patients' perception of olfactory function. Olfactory improvement leads to decreased training due to satisfaction, while lack of improvement leads to non-adherence based on disappointing subjective outcome. Patients should be advised to perform OT consistently.

The effect of smell training on COVID-19 induced smell loss.

OBJECTIVE: while smell training appears to be effective for post viral smell loss, its effectiveness in COVID-19 induced smell loss is currently not well known. Therefore, we aim to investigate the potential effect of smell training on patients with COVID-19 induced smell loss. METHODS: we conducted a case-control study with two comparable cohorts. One of which (n=111) was instructed to perform smell training twice daily for 12 weeks, therapeutical adherence was monitored on a daily schedule, while the other cohort (n=50) did not perform smell training. The Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST) was used to objectify participants' sense of smell at baseline and after 12 weeks, reported as a Threshold, Discrimination, and Identification (TDI) score. We also determined the association between therapeutical adherence and the TDI scores. RESULTS: we found a significant difference in psychophysical smell function between patients with COVID-19 induced smell disorders who performed 12 weeks of smell training and those who did not. Median TDI difference between groups was 2.00 However, there was no association between the therapeutical adherence and olfactory function. CONCLUSION: we discovered a significant moderate difference in psychophysical smell function between patients with COVID-19-induced smell disorders who performed smell training and those who did not, implying a possible advantage of training. However, no relationship was found between therapeutical adherence of smell training and olfactory function.

Olfactory training: effects of multisensory integration, attention towards odors and physical activity.

Olfactory training (OT) has been shown to be of value in the treatment of olfactory dysfunction. The present study aimed to investigate whether the efficacy of OT could be modulated with multisensory integration, attention towards odors, odor complexity, or physical activity assessed with a questionnaire. One hundred healthy participants were recruited and divided into 4 groups. Except for controls (n = 26, mean age ±â€…SD = 36 ±â€…15 years) all participants performed OT 4 times a day. In the "video" group (n = 26, age 39 ±â€…19 years) OT was performed while watching specific and congruent video sequences. In the "counter" group (n = 24, 38 ±â€…17 years) participants additionally counted the number of odors 1 day per week, and in the "training only" group no additional measures were taken in addition to OT (n = 24, 38 ±â€…20 years). "Single-molecule" odorants or "complex mixtures" were distributed randomly for training stimulation. Sniffin' sticks tests (odor identification, odor discrimination, and odor threshold), cognitive tests, and a series of scales were measured at both baseline and after 3 months of OT. The degree of physical activity was recorded with a questionnaire. Olfactory function improved in the video and counter groups after OT, especially for odor threshold and discrimination. Yet, odor complexity and the degree of physical activity had limited effects on olfactory improvement after OT. Both multisensory interaction and attention towards odors plus OT appeared to facilitate improvement of olfactory function in healthy individuals compared with OT alone and controls, which could provide new promising treatments for clinical applications.

Olfactory training effects in children after mild traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) might impair the sense of smell and cognitive functioning. Repeated, systematic exposure to odors, i.e., olfactory training (OT) has been proposed for treatment of olfactory dysfunctions, including post-traumatic smell loss. Additionally, OT has been shown to mitigate cognitive deterioration in older population and enhance selected cognitive functions in adults. We aimed to investigate olfactory and cognitive effects of OT in the pediatric population after mTBI, likely to exhibit cognitive and olfactory deficits. METHODS: Our study comprised 159 children after mTBI and healthy controls aged 6-16 years (M = 9.68 ± 2.78 years, 107 males), who performed 6-months-long OT with a set of 4 either high- or low-concentrated odors. Before and after OT we assessed olfactory functions, fluid intelligence, and executive functions. RESULTS: OT with low-concentrated odors increased olfactory sensitivity in children after mTBI. Regardless of health status, children who underwent OT with low-concentrated odors had higher fluid intelligence scores at post-training measurement, whereas scores of children performing OT with high-concentrated odors did not change. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that OT with low-concentrated odors might accelerate rehabilitation of olfactory sensitivity in children after mTBI and support cognitive functions in the area of fluid intelligence regardless of head trauma.

Effectiveness of olfactory training in COVID-19 patients with olfactory dysfunction: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate effectiveness of olfactory training (OT) in COVID-19 patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: From March 2020 to March 2022, COVID-19 patients with OD were prospectively followed in three European medical centers for a period of 18 months. A standardized OT protocol were recommended to patients. Patient-reported outcome questionnaires and psychophysical evaluations were used to evaluate olfaction at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months after the start of OT. The evolution of olfactory outcome was compared according to the adherence to the OT protocol. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients completed the evaluations. Thirty-two patients fully adhered to the OT, while 25 did not adhere. The psychophysical scores significantly improved from baseline to 6-month post-infection in both groups. In the OT group, the psychophysical scores continued to significantly improve from 6 to 12 months after the start of OT (p = 0.032). The mean duration of OT was 15.4 weeks. The mean delay of patient recovery perception was comparable between groups (27.4 weeks). The occurrence of cacosmia (35.1%) and parosmia (43.9%) throughout the follow-up period was comparable between groups. There proportion of phantosmia was higher in training (34.4%) compared with no-OT (16.0%; p = 0.007) group. The baseline Sniffin'Sticks tests was positively associated with the 6-month Sniffin'Sticks tests (rs = 0.685; p < 0.001) and negatively associated with the time of recovery (rs = - 0.369; p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The adherence to an OT protocol was associated with better mid-term improvement of psychophysical scores. Future large-cohort randomized-controlled studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of OT in COVID-19 patients.

Treatment of COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction with olfactory training, palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin, or combined therapy: a blinded controlled multicenter randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Few evidence-based therapies are available for chronic olfactory dysfunction after COVID-19. This study investigated the relative efficacy of olfactory training alone, co-ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin (um-PEA-LUT, an anti-neuroinflammatory supplement) alone, or combined therapy for treating chronic olfactory dysfunction from COVID-19. METHODS: This double-blinded controlled, placebo-controlled multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 202 patients with persistent COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction of > 6 month duration. After a screening nasal endoscopy, patients were randomized to: (1) olfactory training and placebo; (2) once daily um-PEA-LUT alone; (3) twice daily um-PEA-LUT alone; or (4) combination of once daily um-PEA-LUT with olfactory training. Olfactory testing (Sniffin' Sticks odor identification test) was performed at baseline and at 1, 2, and 3 months. The primary outcome was recovery of over three points on olfactory testing, with outcomes compared at T0, T1, T2 and T3 across groups. Statistical analyses included one-way ANOVA for numeric data and chi-square for nominal data. RESULTS: All patients completed the study, and there were no adverse events. At 90 days, odor identification scores improved by > 3 points in 89.2% of patients receiving combined therapy vs. 36.8% receiving olfactory training with placebo, 40% receiving twice daily um-PEA-LUT alone, and 41.6% receiving once daily um-PEA-LUT alone (p < 0.00001). Patients receiving treatment with um-PEA-LUT alone demonstrated subclinical improvement (< 3 point odor identification improvement) more often than patients receiving olfactory training with placebo (p < 0.0001.) CONCLUSIONS: Olfactory training plus once daily um-PEA-LUT resulted in greater olfactory recovery than either therapy alone in patients with long-term olfactory function due to COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 20112020PGFN on clinicaltrials.gov. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b (Individual Randomized Clinical Trial).

Effects of classical olfactory training in patients with COVID-19-related persistent loss of smell.

PURPOSE: The management of post-COVID-19 persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD) is uncertain. Currently, olfactory training is the only evidence-based therapy for post-viral OD. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of classical olfactory training (COT) in the treatment of post-COVID-19 persistent OD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with persistent OD after COVID-19 were assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks test. Fifty-one patients were then divided into two groups based on personal preference: the COT group (n = 31) included subjects who performed COT over 12 weeks, and the control group (n = 20) included subjects who did not receive any treatment. After the exclusion of eight patients, the olfactory performances of 43 patients were re-evaluated and compared to the baseline values. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of patients in the COT group improved their olfactory scores above the clinically important difference compared to the control group (40% versus 6%) (p = 0.014). The subjective smell improvement by COT was independent of age, gender, OD duration, presence of parosmia, or the initial olfactory score (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Twelve weeks of COT appears to increase the olfactory sensitivity in patients with persistent OD following COVID-19.

Olfactory Training Impacts Olfactory Dysfunction Induced by COVID-19: A Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: Olfactory dysfunction is one of the main symptoms of COVID-19 and may last beyond resolution of the infection. The most promising intervention for post-viral olfactory dysfunction is olfactory training (OT), which involves exposing the olfactory system to a range of odors daily. This approach is thought of promoting the regeneration of olfactory receptor cells, but its effectiveness in patients with post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction has yet to be confirmed. METHODS: This double-blind randomized pilot study compared the effectiveness of OT versus placebo in the treatment of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction. Twenty-five participants were recruited in each group. OT protocol consisted of sniffing 4 scents (rose, orange, clove, and eucalyptus) for 5 min twice daily for 12 weeks. Olfactory function was assessed before and after the training using (1) a validated odor identification test (UPSIT-40) and (2) a 10-point visual analog scale; we further assessed the presence of (3) parosmia. RESULTS: While we did not observe any effect of OT on olfactory test scores, we observed a significant improvement of subjective olfactory function in the intervention group, while no such effect was observed in the placebo group. Finally, the frequency of parosmia was significantly lower in the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights an increase in subjective but not objective olfactory function when performing OT for 12 weeks. Further, parosmia seems to be positively affected by OT. These results may serve as a starting point for larger scale studies to assess the efficacy of OT for treatment of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for treatment of COVID-19-related parosmia: a case report.

Parosmia is a qualitative olfactory dysfunction characterized by distortion of odor perception. Traditional treatments for parosmia include olfactory training and steroids. Some patients infected with COVID-19 have developed chronic parosmia as a result of their infection. Here, we present the case of a patient who developed parosmia after a COVID-19 infection that was not improved by traditional treatments but found significant improvement after hyperbaric oxygen therapy[A1].

The COVANOS trial - insight into post-COVID olfactory dysfunction and the role of smell training.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction is a cardinal symptom of COVID-19 infection, however, studies assessing long-term olfactory dysfunction are limited and no randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of early olfactory training have been conducted. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a prospective, multi-centre study consisting of baseline psychophysical measurements of smell and taste function. Eligible participants were further recruited into a 12-week RCT of olfactory training versus control (safety information). Patient-reported outcomes were measured using an electronic survey and BSIT at baseline and 12 weeks. An additional 1-year follow-up was open to all participants. RESULTS: 218 individuals with a sudden loss of sense of smell of at least 4-weeks were recruited. Psychophysical smell loss was observed in only 32.1%; 63 participants were recruited into the RCT. The absolute difference in BSIT improvement after 12 weeks was 0.45 higher in the intervention arm. 76 participants completed 1-year follow-up; 10/19 (52.6%) of participants with an abnormal baseline BSIT test scored below the normal threshold at 1-year, and 24/29 (82.8%) had persistent parosmia. CONCLUSIONS: Early olfactory training may be helpful, although our findings are inconclusive. Notably, a number of individuals who completed the 1-year assessment had persistent smell loss and parosmia at 1-year. As such, both should be considered important entities of long-Covid and further studies to improve management are highly warranted.

Study on a Flexible Odor-Releasing Device for Olfactory Training.

Olfactory training has been shown to be effective in treating olfactory dysfunction. However, there are hardly any devices that can regularly and quantificationally release odors for olfactory training. A new odor-releasing device, which is low-cost, customizable, semi-automatic, and flexible, was developed in this study. The operation of the device can be easily achieved by the examiner, or even by the participant, simply by pressing a few buttons. A controller system with 15 individual relays was employed to master the working logic for the whole process. The device allows the examiner to isolate from the participants using the Bluetooth module in the control board. The odorants and their concentrations stored in the scent bottles can be customized by the specific requirements of different participants. The odors for training are provided by ultrasonic atomizers, which have simple structures, but powerful features. The flow rates of the odors can also be controlled by altering the rotation speed of the fans. Final experiments on practical odor generation further proved the potential of the developed device for olfactory training. More attention should be paid to the improvements of odor generation devices for olfactory training.

Olfactory dysfunction and training in children with COVID-19 infection: A prospective study Post-COVID pediatric olfactory training.

OBJECTIVE: Postviral olfactory dysfunction (OD) including corona 2019 viral disease (COVID-19) OD occurs in both adults and children. Despite limited reports of efficacy in treating adult postviral including COVID-19 OD with olfactory training (OT), its effects on children in general, and post-COVID-19 in specific, is unknown. The study aimed at evaluating the effects of OT in a COVID-19 OD pediatric cohort. METHODS: A single-arm prospective study of pediatric COVID-19 OD subjects confirmed by the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), was conducted. All subjects underwent OT by sniffing 4 odorants (lavender, orange, peppermint, and eucalyptus) for 1 min twice a day for 3 months. Subjects underwent an odorant identification test (OIT) of the 4 odorants each visit. A repeat UPSIT was administered at the 4th visit. RESULTS: The study enrolled a total of 37 subjects [11 males/26 females with mean age/standard deviation (std) of 15.6(2.1) years]. The time interval between COVID-19 and entry was 5.3(2.4) months. The mean pre/post study UPSIT score improvement was 2.3(4.7), p = .09. OIT scores between entry and 3 subsequent visits showed a mean improvement of 1.8(1.5), 1.8(1.9) and 2.3(1.9) odorants, respectively, with P < .001 for all 3 comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: OT subjects were predominantly female teens with substantial OD lasting greater than 5 months. OT did not affect OD as measured by UPSIT but OIT scores improved during OT. We postulate that OT likely has a role in pediatric post-COVID OD recovery, but UPSIT likely is too rigid to detect disparate odorant improvement.

Alpha-lipoic acid does not improve olfactory training results in olfactory loss due to COVID-19: a double-blind randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: Olfactory loss is a recognized long-term dysfunction after Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. This investigation aimed to assess the effect of alpha-lipoic acid as an adjuvant treatment of olfactory training on the improvement of smell loss in post-COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included 128 adult outpatients who had persistent smell loss for more than 3-months after COVID-19 infection. The participants were randomly allocated into two groups: the intervention treatment group, which received alpha-lipoic acid associated to olfactory training, and comparison treatment group, which received placebo pills associated to olfactory training. The participants were followed-up for 12-weeks. Olfactory dysfunction was assessed in terms of Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) test for the Brazilian population. RESULTS: A total of 100 participants completed the follow-up period and were analyzed in this study. Both groups have improved CCCRC score (p = 0.000), olfactory threshold (p = 0.000), identification score (p = 0.000) and VAS score (p = 0.000) after 12-weeks follow-up. No significant differences were determined between the intervention and comparison treatment groups in CCCRC score (p = 0.63), olfactory threshold (p = 0.50), identification score (p = 0.96) and VAS score (p = 0.97). In all these criteria, comparison treatment group went slightly worse. At the endpoint of the study, the frequency of anosmia reduced to 2% in the intervention treatment group and to 7.8% in the comparison treatment group. Also, 16.8% of the intervention group' subjects, and 15.7% of comparison treatment group's patients reached normosmia. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was a strongly significant difference in olfactory function between baseline and endpoint for both groups. However, based on the lack of significant difference between the intervention treatment and the comparison treatment groups in terms of olfactory changes, our study appoints that the alpha-lipoic acid is not better than olfactory training alone to treat olfactory loss after COVID-19. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2.