BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The exact diagnosis for olfactory dysfunction plays an indispensable complementary role to the proper management of olfactory dysfunction. But there is no confirmative objective method for olfactory function evaluation. Recently, olfactory evoked potential by jet steam method was introduced as an objective method for the evaluation of olfactory function. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical efficacy of olfactory evoked potential. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: Thirty two normal individuals were evaluated with olfactory evoked potential and their olfactory thresholds were within normal range when tested with T&T olfactometry. Odorant, skatole was introduced 1cm apart from the nostril by jet steam pulse. The results were averaged by Neuropack Four Computer. RESULTS: Twenty-nine individuals had typical positive waves with latency near 0.1ms, but three individuals had no typical positive wave. The threshold of twenty individuals in electro-olfactometry was E1 with E1 recognition or detection threshold in T&T olfactometry. The threshold of other nine individuals in electro-olfactometry was E2 with E1 recognition and detection threshold in T&T olfactometry. CONCLUSION: Olfactory evoked potential has good correlation with classic T&T olfactometry and could be used as an objective method for the evaluation of olfactory function.
Diagnosis ; Evoked Potentials* ; Odors ; Olfactometry ; Reference Values ; Skatole ; Smell ; Steam

The sense of smell is one of the essential tools for all living things to survive. With recent increase in diseases associated with olfactory dysfunction, the evaluation of olfactory function aims to shed light on the understanding and assessment of the human olfactory system. The methods for assessing the olfactory function are largely divided into electrophysiological and psychophysical methods. The psychophysical inspections such as University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), The Sniffin' Stick, and T & T Olfactometer are methods mostly based on questionnaires or simple apparatus. Those have been generally used in clinical and research field due to their relatively short examination time and low cost. The electrophysiological tests evaluate olfactory function based on objective measurements like biosignals and medical imaging. Compared to the psychophysical methods, they comparably have higher reliability and are possible to assess more specific diagnosis. However, the system configuration seems to be more complicated. In this paper, we review the overall evaluation methods of olfactory functions and suggest complementary points to improve conventional technologies.
Diagnosis ; Diagnostic Imaging ; Humans ; Olfaction Disorders ; Olfactometry ; Pennsylvania ; Smell* ; Surveys and Questionnaires

OBJECTIVE: To compare the consistency of four olfactory psychophysical test methods. METHOD: Twenty out-patients were done with olfactory psychophysical test and the results were analyzed. The four olfactory psychophysical test methods include simple test method, UPSIT, Sniffin Sticks test and the T&T olfactometer test. RESULT: The consistency of four test methods reached 85%, and UPSIT test can identify pseudo smell obstacles. CONCLUSION There is reliable and stable outcome of the four psychophysical olfactory test methods.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Olfaction Disorders ; diagnosis ; Olfactometry ; methods ; Psychophysics ; Reference Values ; Smell ; Young Adult

OBJECTIVES: Parkinson disease (PD) is frequently associated with olfactory disorder at early stage, which is caused by deposition of Lewy bodies emerging from the olfactory bulb to higher olfactory centers. Early detection of olfactory disorder in the patients with PD may lead to the early diagnosis and treatment for this refractory disease. METHODS: Visual analog scale (VAS), Jet Stream Olfactometry, and Japanese smell identification test, Open Essence (OE), were carried out on 39 patients with PD. Thirty-one patients with postviral olfactory disorder (PVOD), which was caused by the olfactory mucosal dysfunction, were also enrolled in this study as control. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in detection thresholds (2.2 vs. 1.4, P=0.13), recognition thresholds (3.9 vs. 3.5, P=0.39) and OE (4.8 vs. 4.2, P=0.47) between PVOD and PD, while VAS scores of PVOD and PD were significantly different (2.0 and 6.2, P<0.01). In OE, significant differences were observed in the accuracy rates of menthol (68% vs. 44%, P=0.04) and Indian ink (42% vs. 15%, P=0.01) between PVOD and PD. Of particular interest, patients with PVOD tended to select “no detectable,” while patients with PD tended to select wrong alternative other than “no smell detected.” CONCLUSION: Discrepancy between VAS and OE, and high selected rates of wrong alternative other than “undetectable” in OE might be significant signs of olfactory dysfunction associated with PD.
Asian Continental Ancestry Group ; Early Diagnosis ; Humans ; Ink ; Lewy Bodies ; Menthol ; Olfactometry ; Olfactory Bulb ; Parkinson Disease ; Rivers ; Smell ; Visual Analog Scale