International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Olfaction

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftÜbersichtsartikel (Review)BeigetragenBegutachtung

Beitragende

  • International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction - (Autor:in)
  • Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychotherapie und Psychosomatik
  • Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde
  • Stanford Medicine
  • American Academy of Otolaryngology
  • Vanderbilt School of Medicine
  • University of Pittsburgh
  • Harvard Medical School (HMS)
  • Biruni Universitesi
  • Universidade Estadual de Campinas
  • Virginia Commonwealth University
  • Psychology and Psychosomatic Medicine
  • Associazione Naso Sano
  • University of Connecticut
  • Duke University
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUIMC)
  • Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus Dresden
  • University of Louisville
  • London Bridge Hospital
  • Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience
  • Navamindradhiraj University
  • Feinberg School of Medicine
  • Mie University
  • The University of Tokyo
  • Johns Hopkins Medicine
  • University of Vermont Medical Center
  • Emory University
  • Thomas Jefferson University
  • University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
  • Kanazawa Medical University
  • University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine
  • Medizinische Universität Wien
  • Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Monell Chemical Senses Center
  • University of East Anglia
  • The University of Chicago
  • Medical University of South Carolina
  • Tufts University
  • University of Cincinnati
  • Oregon Health and Science University
  • Western University
  • University College London
  • Barts Health NHS Trust

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The literature regarding clinical olfaction, olfactory loss, and olfactory dysfunction has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, with an exponential rise in the past year. There is substantial variability in the quality of this literature and a need to consolidate and critically review the evidence. It is with that aim that we have gathered experts from around the world to produce this International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction (ICAR:O).

METHODS: Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to olfaction. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review, or evidence-based review with recommendations format as dictated by available evidence and scope within the ICAR:O document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:O document was integrated and reviewed by all authors for final consensus.

RESULTS: The ICAR:O document reviews nearly 100 separate topics within the realm of olfaction, including diagnosis, epidemiology, disease burden, diagnosis, testing, etiology, treatment, and associated pathologies.

CONCLUSION: This critical review of the existing clinical olfaction literature provides much needed insight and clarity into the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with olfactory dysfunction, while also clearly delineating gaps in our knowledge and evidence base that we should investigate further.

Details

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Seiten (von - bis)327-680
Seitenumfang354
FachzeitschriftInternational forum of allergy & rhinology
Jahrgang2022
Ausgabenummer12(4)
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 1 Apr. 2022
Peer-Review-StatusJa

Externe IDs

Scopus 85127480132
unpaywall 10.1002/alr.22929
Mendeley bdb6cfbf-1411-3e4d-a1c4-2f2c5baaf510
ORCID /0000-0001-9713-0183/work/146645236
ORCID /0000-0003-1311-8000/work/158767505

Schlagworte

Schlagwörter

  • Consensus, Cost of Illness, Humans, Hypersensitivity, Smell, phantosmia, loss of smell, olfaction, olfactory dysfunction, systematic review, olfactory loss, anosmia, parosmia, evidence-based medicine, hyposmia

Bibliotheksschlagworte