Search

Objective: To develop a French Short Version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (Fr-sQOD) to assess the quality of life impairments of patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD). Methods: Patients with OD and controls were enrolled from 2 academic centers. Individuals completed the Fr-sQOD, an OD visual analog scale severity, and the French version of the sinonasal outcome tool-22 (SNOT-22). Cronbach α was used to measure the internal consistency of Fr-sQOD. The reliability and the external validity of Fr-sQOD were assessed through a test–retest approach and by correlating Fr-sQOD with SNOT-22 scores, respectively. The external validity was assessed by correlation analysis between Fr-sQOD and the result of an assessment of the severity of OD on a visual analog scale. Results: Eighty patients completed the evaluations. The internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach α.96), and the test–retest reliability was high in the entire cohort (rs = 0.877, P <.001). The correlation between Fr-sQOD total scores and the severity of OD was moderate but significant (rs = −0.431; P =.001) supporting an acceptable external validity. Patients with OD had a significantly higher score of Fr-sQOD than healthy individuals (P <.001), indicating a high internal validity. Conclusion: The Fr-sQOD is a reliable and valid self-administered tool in the evaluation of the impact of OD on quality of life of French-speaking patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Post-vaccine olfactory and gustatory disorders are very rare and were reported in patients who received influenza vaccines. In this article, we report 6 cases of post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine olfactory and gustatory disorders in patients with negative nasal swabs. Precisely, olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions were reported in 5 and 1 patients, respectively. Sense disorders occurred after the first injection of AstraZeneca (n = 4) or the second injection of Pfizer (n = 2) vaccines. In 4 cases, the olfactory or gustatory disorder was confirmed with psychophysical evaluations. The duration of chemosensory dysfunction ranged from 4 to 42 days. None of the patient reported mid- or long-term olfactory or gustatory disorder. The occurrence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in adults benefiting from COVID-19 vaccines is still rare but has to be known by otolaryngologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To validate a French version of the Olfactory Disorders Questionnaire (Fr-ODQ). Methods: Patients with olfactory disorder (OD) and controls were enrolled from two medical centers. Individuals completed the Fr-ODQ and the French version of the sinonasal outcome tool-22 (SNOT-22). The extended Sniffin'Sticks procedure was used to test odor Threshold, Discrimination, and Identification (TDI). Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the internal consistency of Fr-ODQ. The reliability and the external validity were evaluated through a test–retest approach and by correlating Fr-ODQ and SNOT-22 scores. Results: Eighty-nine patients with OD and 65 healthy individuals completed the evaluations. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.827, reporting adequate internal consistency. The test–retest reliability was high (rs = 0.944, p = 0.001). The external validity was adequate regarding the significant correlation between Fr-ODQ and SNOT-22 (rs = 0.498; p = 0.001). Patients with OD reported a significant higher score of Fr-ODQ than healthy individuals (p < 0.001), indicating a high internal validity. The baseline Fr-ODQ significantly improved after 3-month olfactory training, which corroborated the improvement of TDI scores. Conclusion: The Fr-ODQ is the first patient-reported outcome questionnaire validated for French speaking patients. Fr-ODQ is reliable and valid for the evaluation of the olfactory dysfunction and the related impact on quality of life of French-speaking patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To study the profile and the therapeutic response of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) at the hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) according to the initial pepsin saliva concentration. Methods: From January 2018 to January 2020, patients with positive LPR diagnosis at the HEMII-pH were consecutively recruited from 3 European Hospitals. Saliva pepsin concentration (Peptest™) was measured during the HEMII-pH testing period and patients were classified into 2 groups: negative versus positive Peptest. The clinical outcomes, that is, gastrointestinal and HEMII-pH findings, reflux symptom score-12 (RSS-12), and 3-month therapeutic response, were compared between groups. Results: A total of 124 patients completed the study. Among them, 30 patients had negative Peptest. Pharyngeal reflux events occurred outside 1-hour post-meal time in 74.0%, after the meals in 20.5% and nighttime in 5.5%. The pepsin saliva level was not significantly associated with the reflux events preceding the sample collection. Patients with positive Peptest had better improvement of RSS-12 digestive and respiratory subscores and oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal findings compared with patients with negative Peptest. Conclusion: Patients with high saliva pepsin concentration had no stronger gastrointestinal, HEMII-pH, or clinical outcomes compared with those with low or undetectable saliva pepsin concentration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) status of patients with initial sudden olfactory anosmia (ISOA) through nasopharyngeal swabs for reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis and to explore their olfactory dysfunctions with psychophysical olfactory evaluation. Methods: A total of 78 ISOA patients were recruited from April 6, 2020, to April 10, 2020, through a public call of University of Mons (Mons, Belgium). Patients benefited from nasopharyngeal swabs and fulfilled the patient-reported outcome questionnaire. Among them, 46 patients performed psychophysical olfactory evaluation using olfactory identification testing. Based on the duration of the ISOA, 2 groups of patients were compared: patients with olfactory dysfunction duration ≤12 days (group 1) and those with duration >12 days (group 2). Results: In group 1, 42 patients (87.5%) had a positive viral load determined by RT-PCR and 6 patients (12.5%) were negative. In group 2, 7 patients (23%) had a positive viral load and 23 patients (77%) were negative. The psychophysical olfactory evaluation reported that anosmia and hyposmia occurred in 24 (52%) and 11 (24%) patients, respectively. Eleven patients were normosmic. The viral load was significantly higher in patients of group 1 compared with those of group 2. Conclusions: Coronavirus disease 2019 was detected in a high proportion of ISOA patients, especially over the first 12 days of olfactory dysfunction. Anosmia is an important symptom to consider in the detection of COVID-19 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The lack of objective data makes it difficult to establish the prognostic value of chemosensitive disorders in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We aimed to prospectively monitor patients diagnosed with COVID-19 to see if the severity of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction associates with subsequent disease severity. Methods: Multicentre prospective study that recruited 106 COVID-19 subjects at diagnosis. Chemosensitive functions were assessed with psychophysical tests within 4 days of clinical onset, at 10 and 20 days. Daily body temperature and oxygen saturation were recorded as markers of disease severity alongside need for hospitalisation. The correlation between olfactory and gustatory scores and disease severity was assessed with linear regression analysis. Results: At T0, 71 patients (67%) presented with olfactory dysfunction while gustatory impairment was detected in 76 cases (65.6%). Chemosensitive disorders gradually improved over the observation period. No significant correlations were found between T0 chemosensitive scores and final disease severity. The correlation between olfactory scores and fever proved significant at T2 (p = 0.05), while the relationship with gustatory scores was significant at T1 (p = 0.01) and T2 (p < 0.001), however neither was clinically relevant. The correlation between chemosensitive scores and oxygen saturation was significant only for taste at T2 (p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis found significant correlations between olfactory impairment severity and need for hospitalization at T2 (OR 3.750, p = 0.005). Conclusions: Initial objective olfactory and gustatory scores do not seem to have a significant prognostic value in predicting the severity of the COVID-19 course; however, persistence of olfactory dysfunction at 20 days, associated with a more severe course. Unfortunately, olfactory and gustatory dysfunction do not seem to hold prognostic value at the time of initial diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop and validate the Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA), a clinical instrument evaluating the physical findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). Methods: A total of 106 patients completed a 3-month treatment based on the association of diet, pantoprazole, alginate, or magaldrate with the LPR characteristics (acid, nonacid, mixed). Forty-two asymptomatic individuals completed the study (control group). The RSA results and reflux finding score (RFS) were documented for the LPR patients at baseline and after treatment. Intrarater reliability was assessed through a test-retest blinded evaluation of signs (7-day intervals). Interrater reliability was assessed by comparing the RSA evaluations of three blinded otolaryngologists through Kendall's W. Responsiveness to change was evaluated through a comparison of the baseline and 3-month posttreatment findings. The RSA cutoffs for determining the presence and absence of LPR were examined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: A total of 102 LPR patients completed the study (68 females). The mean age was 53 years. The mean RSA at baseline was 25.95 ± 9.58; it significantly improved to 18.96 ± 7.58 after 3 months of therapy (P <.001). RSA exhibited good intra- (r = 0.813) and interrater (Kendall's W = 0.663) reliabilities (N = 56). There was no significant association between the RSA, gastrointestinal endoscopy findings, and the types of reflux (acid, nonacid, or mixed) according to impedance-pH monitoring. An RSA >14 may be suggestive of LPR. Conclusion: The RSA is a complete clinical instrument evaluating both laryngeal and extralaryngeal findings associated with LPR. The RSA demonstrated high intra- and interrater reliabilities and responsiveness to change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]