Background/Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of olfactory training (OT) using standardized protocols in patients with post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction. The objective was to assess whether OT, compared to no treatment, placebo, or alternative therapies, improved olfactory function as measured using validated smell tests, including UPSIT, Sniffin’ Sticks (TDI score), CCCRC, and B-SIT. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline was conducted through February 2025 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted on study characteristics (author, year, country, design, sample size), population details (age, sex, post-COVID-19 cause), intervention type (training method, frequency, duration), comparators, outcome measures (baseline and post-intervention olfactory scores), follow-up duration, and reported adverse effects. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan and Open Meta-Analyst. Results: Olfactory training significantly improved the olfactory scores compared to those of the controls. The greatest improvement was observed when OT was combined with PEA-luteolin (MD = 4.62, 95% CI: 2.17–7.06, p = 0.0002), followed by EDTA (MD = 2.33, 95% CI: 0.58–4.08, p = 0.009). Corticosteroids showed a borderline benefit (MD = 1.34, 95% CI: 0.01–2.67, p = 0.05), while alpha-lipoic acid had no significant effect. Combination therapies were associated with higher recovery rates (RR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.13–2.42, p = 0.01). Conclusions: Olfactory training is an effective treatment for post-COVID-19 smell dysfunction. When paired with specific adjunct therapies, particularly PEA-luteolin, it may yield superior recovery outcomes. Further large-scale, standardized RCTs are needed to define optimal treatment protocols.

Background: Voice disorders are a significant occupational concern for teachers, whose work relies heavily on vocal communication. These disorders, which include symptoms such as hoarseness, vocal fatigue, and discomfort, can affect both professional performance and quality of life. Teachers are particularly vulnerable due to the demanding nature of their profession, including prolonged speaking hours, large class sizes, and noisy classroom environments. While the prevalence of voice disorders among teachers is well-documented globally, limited data is available from regions like the Aseer region of Saudi Arabia. This study aims to assess the prevalence, identify risk factors, and evaluate the impact of voice disorders among teachers in Aseer, providing a basis for targeted interventions. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 370 teachers was conducted using the validated Arabic Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10). Data on demographics, vocal symptoms, risk factors, and impacts were collected via an online questionnaire. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics and Fisher’s exact tests to evaluate associations. Results: Over 60% of participants reported voice-related symptoms, primarily hoarseness and vocal fatigue. Classroom noise levels, prolonged vocal use, and large class sizes were significant risk factors. Few teachers (5.1%) had a formal diagnosis, and most (75.4%) did not seek treatment. Voice disorders adversely affected teaching performance and student interactions, with a subset reporting work absenteeism and emotional distress. Conclusions: Voice disorders are common among teachers in the Aseer region and have considerable effects on both teaching performance and teachers' overall well-being. Effective preventive strategies, such as vocal hygiene education, noise reduction, and workload adjustments, are essential. Future interventions should be culturally tailored and consider gender-specific needs. Further research is required to explore the underlying health conditions and psychosocial impacts to refine preventive strategies and improve teachers' vocal health and job satisfaction.

Background: Migraine is a prevalent neurological disorder associated with significant morbidity and social burden. Although various triggers for migraine have been identified, the relationship between smoking and migraine remains unclear. This study aimed to compare migraine characteristics between people with and without smoking in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional study using an online survey tool had been conducted in Saudi Arabia. The survey assessed migraine characteristics, smoking behaviour, demographics, and comorbidities. Statistical analyzes were performed to investigate the occurrence of migraine, smoking behaviour, and demographic factors. Descriptive statistics summarized the data, with various statistical tests employed to compare variables between groups. Results: A total of 229 participants were included in the study, with a majority being young adults (48.47%), predominantly females (66.81%), and holding a bachelor’s degree (63.32%). The study found that 19.2% of individuals with migraine were current smokers, with an average smoking duration of 9.7 years. While some reported relief from migraine pain, others experienced increased pain intensity or frequency. No significant differences were found in migraine characteristics between smokers and non-smokers, but younger individuals and males with migraine were more likely to smoke. The study highlights the complex relationship between smoking and migraine, with varying effects on individuals. Conclusions: The study underscores the lack of significant differences in migraine characteristics between smokers and non-smokers, suggesting that smoking does not play a pivotal role in the clinical presentation of migraines. This insight prompts a shift in research focus towards other potential contributors to migraines, such as genetic predispositions, environmental factors, and comorbidities. Understanding these associations can inform public health strategies aimed at alleviating migraine-related burdens.

Background/Objectives: Migraine and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are both common chronic conditions that may share underlying pathophysiological mechanisms despite presenting with distinct clinical features. Understanding the association between these two conditions could enhance treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes. This review aims to evaluate the relationship between COPD and migraine, highlighting shared risk factors and identifying gaps in the existing literature. Methods: A search was conducted across four electronic databases (PubMed, Ovid Medline, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science) following PRISMA guidelines up to January 2024. The search identified 85 studies, of which five met the inclusion criteria: observational studies, cohort studies, case–control studies, and randomized controlled trials examining the association between migraine and COPD. Studies not published in English and irrelevant study designs were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Tool, which evaluated aspects such as study design, participant selection, measurement methods, and the handling of confounding factors. Results: The review included five studies comprising 184,817 patients. All studies identified a significant association between COPD and migraine, with varying methodologies for diagnosing the conditions. Notably, COPD patients had an increased risk of migraine compared to controls, and migraine patients also demonstrated a higher risk of developing COPD. However, the evidence was marked by high heterogeneity and potential confounding factors. Conclusions: The findings suggest a significant association between COPD and migraine, potentially driven by shared mechanisms such as systemic inflammation. However, the predominance of cross-sectional studies limits causal inference. Future research should prioritize longitudinal studies to clarify the directionality and causality of the relationship between COPD and migraine while thoroughly addressing potential confounding factors.