JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Efficacy of olfactory training in patients with olfactory loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology 2016 March
BACKGROUND: Olfactory loss is a challenging clinical problem with few proven therapeutic options. Early experimental results with olfactory training suggest that this novel therapy may be an effective intervention for olfactory dysfunction of multiple etiologies. The aim of this study was to systematically review currently available studies that assess the efficacy and outcomes of olfactory training in patients with olfactory loss.
METHODS: A comprehensive systematic literature review was performed with the assistance of a reference librarian using the PubMed, PsycInfo, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Proquest databases. Eligible studies were extracted based on defined inclusion criteria and the effect of olfactory training on objective olfactory function was evaluated qualitatively and by meta-analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 10 studies with 639 patients were identified and systematically reviewed. Sufficient data for meta-analysis was available for 3 studies. Patients receiving olfactory training experienced a statistically significant improvement in the Threshold, Discrimination, Identification (TDI) score compared to control patients (mean difference [MD] 3.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.28 to 5.26). Improvement in olfactory function was observed in discrimination (MD 1.92; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.71) and identification (MD 1.61; 95% CI, 0.55 to 2.68), but not in olfactory thresholds (MD -0.01; 95% CI, -0.42 to 0.39).
CONCLUSION: Olfactory training is a promising modality for the treatment of olfactory dysfunction. Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that it may be an effective treatment for olfactory dysfunction due to multiple etiologies. Additional high-quality studies are needed to define indications, outcomes, and duration of therapy for this novel therapy.
METHODS: A comprehensive systematic literature review was performed with the assistance of a reference librarian using the PubMed, PsycInfo, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Proquest databases. Eligible studies were extracted based on defined inclusion criteria and the effect of olfactory training on objective olfactory function was evaluated qualitatively and by meta-analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 10 studies with 639 patients were identified and systematically reviewed. Sufficient data for meta-analysis was available for 3 studies. Patients receiving olfactory training experienced a statistically significant improvement in the Threshold, Discrimination, Identification (TDI) score compared to control patients (mean difference [MD] 3.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.28 to 5.26). Improvement in olfactory function was observed in discrimination (MD 1.92; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.71) and identification (MD 1.61; 95% CI, 0.55 to 2.68), but not in olfactory thresholds (MD -0.01; 95% CI, -0.42 to 0.39).
CONCLUSION: Olfactory training is a promising modality for the treatment of olfactory dysfunction. Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that it may be an effective treatment for olfactory dysfunction due to multiple etiologies. Additional high-quality studies are needed to define indications, outcomes, and duration of therapy for this novel therapy.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app