Evidence Hub

Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunction as an Early Identifier of COVID-19 in Adults and Children: An International Multicenter Study

Cheng-Hao Qiu, C. Cui, C. Hautefort, A. Haehner, Jun Zhao, Qi Yao, H. Zeng, E. Nisenbaum et al.

Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, 2020

394 participants · 109 citations

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of olfactory or gustatory dysfunction in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Study Design Multicenter case series. Setting Five tertiary care hospitals (3 in China, 1 in France, 1 in Germany). Subjects and Methods In total, 394 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)–confirmed COVID-19-positive patients were screened, and those with olfactory or gustatory dysfunction were included. Data including demographics, COVID-19 severity, patient outcome, and the incidence and degree of olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction were collected and analyzed. The Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (QOD) and visual analog scale (VAS) were used to quantify olfactory and gustatory dysfunction, respectively. All subjects at 1 hospital (Shanghai) without subjective olfactory complaints underwent objective testing. Results Of 394 screened subjects, 161 (41%) reported olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction and were included. Incidence of olfactory and/or gustatory disorders in Chinese (n = 239), German (n = 39), and French (n = 116) cohorts was 32%, 69%, and 49%, respectively. The median age of included subjects was 39 years, 92 of 161 (57%) were male, and 10 of 161 (6%) were children. Of included subjects, 10% had only olfactory or gustatory symptoms, and 19% had olfactory and/or gustatory complaints prior to any other COVID-19 symptom. Of subjects with objective olfactory testing, 10 of 90 demonstrated abnormal chemosensory function…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 394 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free