Does Olfactory Training Improve Brain Function and Cognition? A Systematic Review

Olfactory training (OT), or smell training,consists of repeated exposure to odorants over time with the intended neuroplastic effect of improving or remediating olfactory functioning. Declines in olfaction parallel declines in cognition in various pathological conditions and aging. Research suggests a dynamic neural connection exists between olfaction and cognition. Thus, if OT can improve olfaction, could OT also improve cognition and support brain function? To answer this question, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine whether there is evidence that OT translates to improved cognition or altered brain morphology and connectivity that supports cognition. Across three databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, & Embase), 18 articles were identified in this systematic review. Overall, the reviewed studies provided emerging evidence that OT is associated with improved global cognition, and in particular, verbal fluency and verbal learning/memory. OT is also associated with increases in the volume/size of olfactory-related brain regions, including the olfactory bulb and hippocampus, and altered functional connectivity. Interestingly, these positive effects were not limited to patients with smell loss (i.e., hyposmia & anosmia) but normosmic (i.e., normal ability to smell) participants benefitted as well. Implications for practice and research are provided.

Olfactory training in normosmic individuals: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Even if olfactory training (OT) is a well-established treatment for individuals with olfactory dysfunction, the effect on individuals with normosmia remains uncertain. In this randomised controlled trial, we explore how OT with different exposure lengths affect olfactory function in individuals with normosmia.

METHODOLOGY

Two hundred normosmic individuals were randomly assigned to one of two intervention groups performing OT with different exposure lengths or to a control group. The OT groups did OT twice daily for three months, g four different odours (eucalyptus, lavender, mint, and lemon) for 10 seconds per bottle during either a total of 40 seconds (standard OT) or 4 minutes (extended OT), while the control group did not perform any OT. Olfactory function was assessed using a 48-item Sniffin Sticks test at baseline, after the intervention, and after one year.

RESULTS

We found no significant effect of OT in either of the intervention groups on any aspect of olfaction after intervention or at follow-up. There was no association between sex, age, allergic rhinitis, education or olfactory scores at baseline, and changes in olfactory function after OT. The extended OT group performed significantly fewer training sessions compared to those in the standard OT group.

CONCLUSIONS

OT had a limited effect on olfactory function in individuals with normosmia. Further, the superiority of a more extended OT is not supported by this study, and shorter training sessions seem to improve compliance with OT.

Treatment adherence to olfactory training: a real-world observational study

BACKGROUND

Olfactory training (OT) is considered an effective intervention for most causes of smell loss and is recommended as a long-term treatment. However, the treatment adherence of OT remains unclear. This study aims to identify the frequency and causalities for lack of adherence to OT.

METHODS

In this prospective study, 53 patients previously diagnosed with olfactory dysfunction (OD), who were recommended to perform OT, were enrolled. Patients underwent olfactory testing using Sniffin' Sticks for threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) and a subjective numeric rating scale (NRS) at a baseline and follow-up visit. In addition, patients answered a six-item treatment adherence questionnaire. The primary outcome measures were clinically relevant improvements according to the TDI (>=5.5) and NRS (>=5.5) scores.

RESULTS

Out of 53 patients, 45 performed OT. Among patients who performed OT, 31% discontinued the use of OT on their own due to a self-perceived improvement, while 51% discontinued use due to lack of improvements in olfaction. In these patients, the average duration of OT use was five months. After controlling for baseline duration of OD, baseline TDI score and smell loss aetiologies, discontinuing OT due to a lack of self-perceived improvement remained significantly associated with worse TDI and NRS outcomes at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show that therapeutical adherence to OT is low, regardless of patients' perception of olfactory function. Olfactory improvement leads to decreased training due to satisfaction, while lack of improvement leads to non-adherence based on disappointing subjective outcome. Patients should be advised to perform OT consistently.

Olfactory training with four and eight odors: comparison with clinical testing and olfactory bulb volumetrics

PURPOSE

Post-infectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) is one of the most common causes of olfactory impairment but has limited treatment options. Recently, olfactory training (OT) has been considered an effective treatment method; however, several questions have arisen regarding its optimal scheme. The aim of this study was to assess whether an OT scheme with 8 odors is more effective than the classic OT scheme with 4 odors by comparing psychophysical test results and olfactory bulb (OB) volumetrics.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, 72 patients with PIOD were included. The patients followed either the classic 4-odor OT scheme (COT; n = 34 patients) or an extended 8-odor scheme (EOT; n = 38 patients) for 16 weeks. All patients underwent olfactory testing with a Sniffin'Sticks battery test at 0, 8, and 16 weeks. Of the patients, 38 underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging for OB volumetric assessment before and after treatment.

RESULTS

The comparison of the olfactory test results did not show any significant difference between the two study groups, in agreement with the OB volumetrics. The convex OB showed better test results than the non-convex OB, with significantly better improvement after treatment regardless of OT type. The EOT group presented significantly better adherence than the COT group.

CONCLUSION

The number of odors did not appear to play a significant role in the effect of the OT. However, the training scheme with more than four odors showed better adherence among the patients in a long-term treatment plan. The shape of the OB may have prognostic value in clinical assessment and warrants further investigation.

Olfactory dysfunction and training in children with COVID-19 infection: A prospective study Post-COVID pediatric olfactory training

OBJECTIVE

Postviral olfactory dysfunction (OD) including corona 2019 viral disease (COVID-19) OD occurs in both adults and children. Despite limited reports of efficacy in treating adult postviral including COVID-19 OD with olfactory training (OT), its effects on children in general, and post-COVID-19 in specific, is unknown. The study aimed at evaluating the effects of OT in a COVID-19 OD pediatric cohort.

METHODS

A single-arm prospective study of pediatric COVID-19 OD subjects confirmed by the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), was conducted. All subjects underwent OT by sniffing 4 odorants (lavender, orange, peppermint, and eucalyptus) for 1 min twice a day for 3 months. Subjects underwent an odorant identification test (OIT) of the 4 odorants each visit. A repeat UPSIT was administered at the 4th visit.

RESULTS

The study enrolled a total of 37 subjects [11 males/26 females with mean age/standard deviation (std) of 15.6(2.1) years]. The time interval between COVID-19 and entry was 5.3(2.4) months. The mean pre/post study UPSIT score improvement was 2.3(4.7), p = .09. OIT scores between entry and 3 subsequent visits showed a mean improvement of 1.8(1.5), 1.8(1.9) and 2.3(1.9) odorants, respectively, with P < .001 for all 3 comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

OT subjects were predominantly female teens with substantial OD lasting greater than 5 months. OT did not affect OD as measured by UPSIT but OIT scores improved during OT. We postulate that OT likely has a role in pediatric post-COVID OD recovery, but UPSIT likely is too rigid to detect disparate odorant improvement.

Alpha-lipoic acid does not improve olfactory training results in olfactory loss due to COVID-19: a double-blind randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

Olfactory loss is a recognized long-term dysfunction after Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. This investigation aimed to assess the effect of alpha-lipoic acid as an adjuvant treatment of olfactory training on the improvement of smell loss in post-COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial included 128 adult outpatients who had persistent smell loss for more than 3-months after COVID-19 infection. The participants were randomly allocated into two groups: the intervention treatment group, which received alpha-lipoic acid associated to olfactory training, and comparison treatment group, which received placebo pills associated to olfactory training. The participants were followed-up for 12-weeks. Olfactory dysfunction was assessed in terms of Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) test for the Brazilian population.

RESULTS

A total of 100 participants completed the follow-up period and were analyzed in this study. Both groups have improved CCCRC score (p = 0.000), olfactory threshold (p = 0.000), identification score (p = 0.000) and VAS score (p = 0.000) after 12-weeks follow-up. No significant differences were determined between the intervention and comparison treatment groups in CCCRC score (p = 0.63), olfactory threshold (p = 0.50), identification score (p = 0.96) and VAS score (p = 0.97). In all these criteria, comparison treatment group went slightly worse. At the endpoint of the study, the frequency of anosmia reduced to 2% in the intervention treatment group and to 7.8% in the comparison treatment group. Also, 16.8% of the intervention group' subjects, and 15.7% of comparison treatment group's patients reached normosmia.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there was a strongly significant difference in olfactory function between baseline and endpoint for both groups. However, based on the lack of significant difference between the intervention treatment and the comparison treatment groups in terms of olfactory changes, our study appoints that the alpha-lipoic acid is not better than olfactory training alone to treat olfactory loss after COVID-19.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2.

Treatment of COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction with olfactory training, palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin, or combined therapy: a blinded controlled multicenter randomized trial

PURPOSE

Few evidence-based therapies are available for chronic olfactory dysfunction after COVID-19. This study investigated the relative efficacy of olfactory training alone, co-ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin (um-PEA-LUT, an anti-neuroinflammatory supplement) alone, or combined therapy for treating chronic olfactory dysfunction from COVID-19.

METHODS

This double-blinded controlled, placebo-controlled multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 202 patients with persistent COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction of > 6 month duration. After a screening nasal endoscopy, patients were randomized to: (1) olfactory training and placebo; (2) once daily um-PEA-LUT alone; (3) twice daily um-PEA-LUT alone; or (4) combination of once daily um-PEA-LUT with olfactory training. Olfactory testing (Sniffin' Sticks odor identification test) was performed at baseline and at 1, 2, and 3 months. The primary outcome was recovery of over three points on olfactory testing, with outcomes compared at T0, T1, T2 and T3 across groups. Statistical analyses included one-way ANOVA for numeric data and chi-square for nominal data.

RESULTS

All patients completed the study, and there were no adverse events. At 90 days, odor identification scores improved by > 3 points in 89.2% of patients receiving combined therapy vs. 36.8% receiving olfactory training with placebo, 40% receiving twice daily um-PEA-LUT alone, and 41.6% receiving once daily um-PEA-LUT alone (p < 0.00001). Patients receiving treatment with um-PEA-LUT alone demonstrated subclinical improvement (< 3 point odor identification improvement) more often than patients receiving olfactory training with placebo (p < 0.0001.) CONCLUSIONS: Olfactory training plus once daily um-PEA-LUT resulted in greater olfactory recovery than either therapy alone in patients with long-term olfactory function due to COVID-19.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

20112020PGFN on clinicaltrials.gov.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b (Individual Randomized Clinical Trial).

Olfactory training effects in children after mild traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVE

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) might impair the sense of smell and cognitive functioning. Repeated, systematic exposure to odors, i.e., olfactory training (OT) has been proposed for treatment of olfactory dysfunctions, including post-traumatic smell loss. Additionally, OT has been shown to mitigate cognitive deterioration in older population and enhance selected cognitive functions in adults. We aimed to investigate olfactory and cognitive effects of OT in the pediatric population after mTBI, likely to exhibit cognitive and olfactory deficits.

METHODS

Our study comprised 159 children after mTBI and healthy controls aged 6-16 years (M = 9.68 ± 2.78 years, 107 males), who performed 6-months-long OT with a set of 4 either high- or low-concentrated odors. Before and after OT we assessed olfactory functions, fluid intelligence, and executive functions.

RESULTS

OT with low-concentrated odors increased olfactory sensitivity in children after mTBI. Regardless of health status, children who underwent OT with low-concentrated odors had higher fluid intelligence scores at post-training measurement, whereas scores of children performing OT with high-concentrated odors did not change.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that OT with low-concentrated odors might accelerate rehabilitation of olfactory sensitivity in children after mTBI and support cognitive functions in the area of fluid intelligence regardless of head trauma.

Impact of a 12-week olfactory training programme in women with migraine with aura: protocol for a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a leading cause of disability and suffering worldwide. However, conventional pharmacological migraine preventive therapies are often challenging and accompanied by adverse effects. Recently, structured odour exposure has shown to successfully increase pain thresholds in patients with chronic back pain. Despite the importance of the olfactory system in migraine, there are no studies investigating the impact of structured odour exposure in patients with migraine.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial will be conducted at the Headache Clinic of the University Pain Center at TU Dresden, Germany and aims at investigating the impact of a 12-week structured exposure to odours in women with migraine. Fifty-four women between 18 and 55 years with migraine with aura will be recruited and randomised to training with odours and odourless training. The primary outcomes are mechanical and electrical pain thresholds. Secondary outcomes comprise olfactory threshold and the number of headache days. Other exploratory measurements are headache associated pain intensity, acute analgesic intake, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and quality of life. Additionally, this protocol assesses neuroanatomical and neurofunctional changes associated with the 12-week olfactory training. Data analysis will be executed on the basis of the general linear model considering repeated measurements.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approvals were obtained from the Ethics Board of the TU Dresden (Protocol No. BO-EK-353082020). Participation will only be possible after written informed consent is provided. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00027399.

Efficacy of Combined Visual-Olfactory Training With Patient-Preferred Scents as Treatment for Patients With COVID-19 Resultant Olfactory Loss: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The number of olfactory dysfunction cases has increased dramatically because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Identifying therapies that aid and accelerate recovery is essential.

Objective

To determine the efficacy of bimodal visual-olfactory training and patient-preferred scents vs unimodal olfactory training and physician-assigned scents in COVID-19 olfactory loss.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a randomized, single-blinded trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design (bimodal, patient preferred; unimodal, physician assigned; bimodal, physician assigned; unimodal, patient preferred) and an independent control group. Enrollment occurred from February 1 to May 27, 2021. Participants were adults 18 to 71 years old with current olfactory loss defined as University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) score less than 34 for men and less than 35 for women and duration of 3 months or longer. Olfactory loss was initially diagnosed within 2 weeks of COVID-19 infection.

Interventions

Participants sniffed 4 essential oils for 15 seconds with a 30-second rest in between odors for 3 months. Participants in the physician-assigned odor arms trained with rose, lemon, eucalyptus, and clove. Participants randomized to the patient-preferred arms chose 4 of 24 available scents. If assigned to the bimodal arm, participants were shown digital images of the essential oil they were smelling.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was postintervention change in UPSIT score from baseline; measures used were the UPSIT (validated, objective psychometric test of olfaction), Clinical Global Impressions Impression-Improvement (CGI-I; self-report improvement scale), and Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating (ODOR; olfaction-related quality-of-life questionnaire).

Results

Among the 275 enrolled participants, the mean (SD) age was 41 (12) years, and 236 (86%) were female. The change in UPSIT scores preintervention to postintervention was similar between the study arms. The marginal mean difference for change in UPSIT scores preintervention to postintervention between participants randomized to patient-preferred vs physician-assigned olfactory training was 0.73 (95% CI, -1.10 to 2.56), and between participants randomized to bimodal vs unimodal olfactory training was 1.10 (95% CI, -2.92 to 0.74). Five (24%) participants in the control arm had clinically important improvement on UPSIT compared with 18 (53%) in the bimodal, patient-preferred arm for a difference of 29% (95% CI, 4%-54%). Four (19%) participants in the control group self-reported improvement on CGI-I compared with 12 (35%) in the bimodal, patient-preferred arm for a difference of 16% (95% CI, -7% to 39%). The mean change in ODOR score preintervention to postintervention was 11.6 points (95% CI, 9.2-13.9), which was not deemed clinically important nor significantly different between arms.

Conclusions and Relevance

Based on the change in UPSIT scores, this randomized clinical trial did not show any difference between intervention arms, but when exploring within-patient change in UPSIT as well as self-reported impression of improvement, active interventions were associated with larger improvement than controls with a potential advantage of bimodal intervention. While not definitive, these results suggest that patients with COVID-19 olfactory loss may benefit from bimodal visual-olfactory training with patient-preferred scents.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04710394.

Olfactory training: effects of multisensory integration, attention towards odors and physical activity

Olfactory training (OT) has been shown to be of value in the treatment of olfactory dysfunction. The present study aimed to investigate whether the efficacy of OT could be modulated with multisensory integration, attention towards odors, odor complexity, or physical activity assessed with a questionnaire. One hundred healthy participants were recruited and divided into 4 groups. Except for controls (n = 26, mean age ± SD = 36 ± 15 years) all participants performed OT 4 times a day. In the "video" group (n = 26, age 39 ± 19 years) OT was performed while watching specific and congruent video sequences. In the "counter" group (n = 24, 38 ± 17 years) participants additionally counted the number of odors 1 day per week, and in the "training only" group no additional measures were taken in addition to OT (n = 24, 38 ± 20 years). "Single-molecule" odorants or "complex mixtures" were distributed randomly for training stimulation. Sniffin' sticks tests (odor identification, odor discrimination, and odor threshold), cognitive tests, and a series of scales were measured at both baseline and after 3 months of OT. The degree of physical activity was recorded with a questionnaire. Olfactory function improved in the video and counter groups after OT, especially for odor threshold and discrimination. Yet, odor complexity and the degree of physical activity had limited effects on olfactory improvement after OT. Both multisensory interaction and attention towards odors plus OT appeared to facilitate improvement of olfactory function in healthy individuals compared with OT alone and controls, which could provide new promising treatments for clinical applications.

Study on a Flexible Odor-Releasing Device for Olfactory Training

Olfactory training has been shown to be effective in treating olfactory dysfunction. However, there are hardly any devices that can regularly and quantificationally release odors for olfactory training. A new odor-releasing device, which is low-cost, customizable, semi-automatic, and flexible, was developed in this study. The operation of the device can be easily achieved by the examiner, or even by the participant, simply by pressing a few buttons. A controller system with 15 individual relays was employed to master the working logic for the whole process. The device allows the examiner to isolate from the participants using the Bluetooth module in the control board. The odorants and their concentrations stored in the scent bottles can be customized by the specific requirements of different participants. The odors for training are provided by ultrasonic atomizers, which have simple structures, but powerful features. The flow rates of the odors can also be controlled by altering the rotation speed of the fans. Final experiments on practical odor generation further proved the potential of the developed device for olfactory training. More attention should be paid to the improvements of odor generation devices for olfactory training.

The COVANOS trial - insight into post-COVID olfactory dysfunction and the role of smell training

BACKGROUND

Olfactory dysfunction is a cardinal symptom of COVID-19 infection, however, studies assessing long-term olfactory dysfunction are limited and no randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of early olfactory training have been conducted.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a prospective, multi-centre study consisting of baseline psychophysical measurements of smell and taste function. Eligible participants were further recruited into a 12-week RCT of olfactory training versus control (safety information). Patient-reported outcomes were measured using an electronic survey and BSIT at baseline and 12 weeks. An additional 1-year follow-up was open to all participants.

RESULTS

218 individuals with a sudden loss of sense of smell of at least 4-weeks were recruited. Psychophysical smell loss was observed in only 32.1%; 63 participants were recruited into the RCT. The absolute difference in BSIT improvement after 12 weeks was 0.45 higher in the intervention arm. 76 participants completed 1-year follow-up; 10/19 (52.6%) of participants with an abnormal baseline BSIT test scored below the normal threshold at 1-year, and 24/29 (82.8%) had persistent parosmia.

CONCLUSIONS

Early olfactory training may be helpful, although our findings are inconclusive. Notably, a number of individuals who completed the 1-year assessment had persistent smell loss and parosmia at 1-year. As such, both should be considered important entities of long-Covid and further studies to improve management are highly warranted.