Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Essential Oil Olfactory Test: Comparison of Affordable Rapid Olfaction Measurement Array (AROMA) to Sniffin' Sticks 12.
Li, Jennifer; Palmer, Gracie; Shankar, Suraj; Villwock, Mark R; Chiu, Alexander G; Sykes, Kevin J; Villwock, Jennifer A.
Afiliação
  • Li J; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
  • Palmer G; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
  • Shankar S; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
  • Villwock MR; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
  • Chiu AG; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
  • Sykes KJ; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
  • Villwock JA; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
OTO Open ; 4(4): 2473974X20962464, 2020.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33748649
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

To further demonstrate the validity of Affordable Rapid Olfaction Measurement Array (AROMA), an essential oil-based smell test, and compare it to the Sniffin' Sticks 12 Test (SST12). STUDY

DESIGN:

Prospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING:

Academic medical center.

METHODS:

Fifty healthy individuals without sinonasal disease were recruited to the study. AROMA has been previously validated against the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test. The current study tests 2 additional higher concentrations to increase the ability to detect olfactory reserve. Healthy participants completed AROMA, SST12, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), and Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (QoD). Spearman correlations were used to evaluate AROMA, SST, SNOT-22, and QoD.

RESULTS:

AROMA demonstrated strong test-retest reliability (r = 0.757, P < .01). AROMA showed a moderate correlation to SST12 (ρ = 0.412, P < .01). Age and SNOT-22 were significantly correlated (P < .05) with AROMA (ρ = -0.547, -0.331, respectively), and age was weakly correlated with SST (ρ = -0.377, P < .01). Median percent correct scores were as follows SST12 identification, 92%; AROMA detection, 90%; and AROMA identification, 81%. Median correct odor identification of AROMA concentrations at 1×, 2×, 4×, and 8× were 64%, 75%, 92%, and 92%, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

AROMA has a moderate correlation with SST12. AROMA is more strongly correlated than SST12 to age and SNOT-22. AROMA's stronger correlation with subjective olfactory status, low cost, and adaptability may help remove barriers to routine olfactory testing in the clinic.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article