medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía

2023, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Arch Neurocien 2023; 28 (1)

Feasibility of a culture-specific moroccan smell identification test (morosit): a proposal using the case of Parkinson disease

Mohamed C, Hanane I, Raymond K, Najib K

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 8-12
PDF size: 231.76 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: No culture-specific standardized olfactory tests exist in Morocco as yet. Olfactory problems are frequent in Parkinson disease.
Aim: To show the feasibility of investigating olfactory impairment using culture-relevant products (indigenous plant extracts) as a preliminary to the creation of a standardized olfactory test.
Method: Analytical cross-sectional study on a group of 69 patients with Parkinson disease, and a group of 66 healthy volunteers, in order to assess odor threshold, odor identification, and odor discrimination in both groups using Mentha pulegium and Lavandula latifolia extracts.
Results: We observed an increased mean of odor detection threshold in patients compared to healthy subjects (p‹0.001). A significant difference was also found in the ability to discriminate odors; a higher number of patients were unable to distinguish between odors (p‹0.001). Regarding the odor identification test, 70% of healthy subjects versus 36% of patients were able to correctly identify the test products. The difference was statistically significant (p‹0.001).
Conclusions: Our study points to the potential of using indigenous products — with which patients are familiar — in the elaboration of a standardized smell identification screening battery.


REFERENCES

  1. Doty RL. Olfaction in Parkinson’s disease and related disorders.Neurobiol Dis. 2012; 46(3):527–52. doi: 10.1016/j.nbd.2011.10.026

  2. Doty RL, Laing DG. Psychophysical Measurement of HumanOlfactory Function. In: Handbook of Olfaction and Gustation.Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons; 2015. p. 225–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118971758.ch11

  3. Doty RL, Cometto-Muñiz JE, Jalowayski AA, Dalton P, Kendal-Reed M, Hodgson M. Assessment of upper respiratory tract and ocularirritative effects of volatile chemicals in humans. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2004; 34(2):85–142. doi: 10.1080/10408440490269586.

  4. Yousem DM, Geckle RJ, Doty RL, Bilker WB. Reproducibility and reliability of volumetric measurements of olfactory eloquent structures.Acad Radiol. 1997; 4(4):264-9.

  5. Doty RL. Office procedures for quantitative assessment of olfactory function. Am J Rhinol. 2007; 21(4):460–73. doi: 10.2500/ajr.2007.21.3043

  6. Doty RL, Shaman P, Dann M. Development of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test: a standardized microencapsulatedtest of olfactory function. Physiol Behav. 1984; 32(3):489–502. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(84)90269-5

  7. Dodé C, Hardelin J-P. Kallmann syndrome. Eur J Hum Genet. 2009; 17(2):139–46.

  8. Pellegrino R, Farruggia MC, Small DM, Veldhuizen MG. Post-traumatic olfactory loss and brain response beyond olfactory cortex. Sci Rep.2021; 11(1):4043. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-83621-2

  9. Temmel AFP, Quint C, Schickinger-Fischer B, Klimek L, Stoller E, Hummel T. Characteristics of olfactory disorders in relation to majorcauses of olfactory loss. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002; 128(6):635–41.doi: 10.1001/archotol.128.6.635

  10. Wolfensberger M. Sniffin’Sticks: a new olfactory test battery. Acta Otolaryngol. 2000; 120(2):303–6. doi: 10.1080/000164800750001134

  11. Hummel T, Sekinger B, Wolf SR, Pauli E, Kobal G. 'Sniffin' sticks': olfactory performance assessed by the combined testing of odoridentification, odor discrimination and olfactory threshold. Chem Senses. 1997; 22(1):39–52. doi: 10.1093/chemse/22.1.39

  12. Doty RL, McKeown DA, Lee WW, Shaman P. A study of the test-retest reliability of ten olfactory tests. Chem Senses. 1995; 20(6):645–56.doi:10.1093/chemse/20.6.645

  13. Hedner M, Larsson M, Arnold N, Zucco GM, Hummel T. Cognitive factors in odor detection, odor discrimination, and odor identificationtasks. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2010; 32(10):1062–7. doi: 10.1080/13803391003683070

  14. Parola S, Liberini P. Assessing olfaction in the Italian population: methodology and clinical application. Ital J Neurol Sci. 1999; 20(5):287–96. doi: 10.1007/s100720050043

  15. Jiang R-S, Su M-C, Liang K-L, Shiao J-Y, Wu S-H, Hsin C-H. A pilot study of a traditional Chinese version of the University of PennsylvaniaSmell Identification Test for application in Taiwan. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2010; 24(1):45–50.

  16. Fornazieri MA, Santos CA dos, Bezerra TFP, Pinna F de R, Voegels RL, Doty RL. Development of normative data for the Brazilian adaptationof the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test. Chem Senses. 2015; 40(2):141–9.

  17. Rodríguez-Violante M, Gonzalez-Latapi P, Camacho-Ordoñez A, Martínez-Ramírez D, Morales-Briceño H, Cervantes-Arriaga A.Comparing the accuracy of different smell identification tests in Parkinson’s disease: relevance of cultural aspects. Clin Neurol Neurosurg.2014; 123:9–14. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2014.04.030

  18. Yücepur C, Ozücer B, Değirmenci N, Yıldırım Y, Veyseller B, Ozturan O. University of Pennsylvania smell identification test: application toTurkish population. Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg. 2012; 22(2):77–80. doi: 10.5606/kbbihtisas.2012.014

  19. Doty RL, Marcus A, Lee WW. Development of the 12-item Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test (CC-SIT). Laryngoscope. 1996; 106(3Pt 1):353–6.

  20. Alrhman R, Qudah N, Al-zubidi A, Al-Qudah M. Jordan smell test: a pilot study. Pan Arab J Rhinol. 2020; 10(1):13-6.

  21. Hsu N-I, Lai J-T, Shen P-H. Development of Taiwan Smell Identification Test: a quick office-based smell screening test for Taiwanese. Am JRhinol Allergy. 2015; 29(2):e50-4.

  22. Ogihara H, Kobayashi M, Nishida K, Kitano M, Takeuchi K. Applicability of the cross-culturally modified University of Pennsylvania SmellIdentification Test in a Japanese population. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2011; 25(6):404–10. doi: 10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3658




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com