The condition of olfactory function and its impact on the quality of life in patients depending on the disorder of the nasal passages’ patency

February 3, 2022
1019
Specialities :
Resume

An important part in researching of the quality of nasal breathing is determination not only of the quantitative indicators of the air passage through the nose, but also the subjective feelings of satisfaction with nasal breathing. There are cases of impaired quality of life of patients due to sinonasal symptoms with free nasal breathing and air resistance in the nasal passages within normal limits.

Objective: to discover the influence of olfactory reception on patients’ satisfaction with the quality of life and respiratory function of the nose, depending on the disorder of the nasal passages’ patency.

Materials and methods. 75 patients who suffered of nasal breathing disorders and/or were dissatisfied with the quality of nasal breathing were examined. All patients were surveyed on the quality of life according to the questionnaire SNOT=22, underwent computer rhinomanometry, and olfactometry using Sniffin’ Sticks tests.

Conclusion. One of the reasons for dissatisfaction with the quality of nasal breathing of patients with normal indicators of total air resistance (R150 (tot.)<0.25 Pa/cm3/s) may be olfactory receptor dysfunction (hyposmia and anosmia), which is manifested not only by impaired odor recognition and the sharpness of perception, but also a disorder of the formation of patient’s subjective feelings of nasal breathing satisfaction and quality of life.

References

  • 1. Rimmer J., Hellings P., Lund V. et al. (2019) European position paper on diagnostic tools in rhinology. Rhinol. j., 57(S28): 1–41.
  • 2. Stewart M., Witsell D., Smith T. et al. (2004) Development and Validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg., 130(2): 157–163.
  • 3. Piccirillo J., Merritt M., Richards M. (2002) Psychometric and Clinimetric Validity of the 20-Item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (Snot-20). Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg., 126(1): 41–47.
  • 4. Hopkins C., Gillett S., Slack R. et al. (2009) Psychometric validity of the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test. Clin. Otolaryngol., 34(5): 447–454.
  • 5. Gelardi M., Piccininni K., Quaranta N. et al. (2019) Olfactory dysfunction in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps is associated with clinical-cytological grading severity. Acta Otorhinolaryngol. Ital., 39(5): 329–335.
  • 6. Frasnelli J., Hummel T. (2004) Olfactory dysfunction and daily life. Eur. Arch. Oto-Rhino-Laryngol., 262(3): 231–235.
  • 7. Mozzanica F., Preti A., Gera R. et al. (2019) Quality of life impairment and its assessment in patients with olfactory dysfunction. Otorinolaringol., 69(3).
  • 8. Morley A., Sharp H. (2006) A review of sinonasal outcome scoring systems — which is best? Clin Otolaryngol., 31(2): 103–109.
  • 9. Hummel T., Sekinger B., Wolf S. et al. (1997) «Sniffin’ Sticks»: Olfactory Performance Assessed by the Combined Testing of Odour Identification, Odor Discrimination and Olfactory Threshold. Chemical Senses, 22(1): 39–52.
  • 10. Hummel T., Whitcroft K., Andrews P. et al. (2017) Position paper on olfactory dysfunction. Rhinol. J., 54(26): 1–30.
  • 11. Magliulo G., De Vincentiis M., Iannella G. et al. (2018) Olfactory evaluation in obstructive sleep apnoea patients. Acta Otorhinolaryngol. Ital., 38(4): 338–345.
  • 12. Damm M. (2002) Intranasal Volume and Olfactory Function. Chemical Senses, 27(9): 831–839.
  • 13. Zhao K., Jiang J., Pribitkin E. et al. (2014) Conductive olfactory losses in chronic rhinosinusitis? A computational fluid dynamics study of 29 patients. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol., 4(4): 298–308.
  • 14. Avrunin O., Nosova Y., Zlepko S. et al. (2019) Assessment of the diagnostic value of the method of computer olfactometry. Informatyka, Automatyka, Pomiary w Gospodarce i Ochronie Środowiska, 9(3): 18–21.
  • 15. Oka S., Kawanabe H., Yamanobe S. et al. (2020) Relationship between olfaction and maxillofacial morphology in children with malocclusion. Clin. Experiment. Dent. Res., 7(1): 33–39.
  • 16. Olszewska E, Sieskiewicz A, Kasacka I, Rogowski M, Zukowska M, Soroczyńska J. et al. Cytology of nasal mucosa, olfactometry and rhinomanometry in patients after CO2 laser mucotomy in inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Folia Histochemica et Cytobiologica, 2010; 48(2).
  • 17. Шкорботун В.О., Шкорботун Я.В. (2020) Оцінка якості життя пацієнтів з кістами верхньощелепних синусів після ендоскопічної синусотомії в залежності від хірургічного доступу. Оториноларингологія, 4(3).
  • 18. Fokkens W., Lund V., Hopkins C. et al. (2020) European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020. Rhinology J., 58(Suppl. S29): 1–464.
  • 19. Toma S., Hopkins C. (2016) Stratification of SNOT-22 scores into mild, moderate or severe and relationship with other subjective instruments. Rhinology J., 54(2): 129–133.
  • 20. Karlsson A., Persson M., Mjörnheim A. et al. (2020) Total nasal airway resistance while sitting predicts airway collapse when lying down. J. Laryngol. Otol., 134(10): 917–924.
  • 21. Moore M., Eccles R. (2012) Normal nasal patency: problems in obtaining standard reference values for the surgeon. J. Laryngol. Otol., 126(6): 563–569.
  • 22. Hinz A., Luck T., Riedel-Heller S. et al. (2018) Olfactory dysfunction: properties of the Sniffin’ Sticks Screening 12 test and associations with quality of life. Eur. Arch. Oto-Rhino-Laryngol., 276(2): 389–395.
  • 23. Mann H., Whitney D. (1947) On a Test of Whether one of Two Random Variables is Stochastically Larger than the Other. Ann. Mathem. Stat., 18(1): 50–60.