Background: Qualitative smell/taste disorders (such as phantosmia, parosmia, phantogeusia, and parageusia) have not yet been fully characterized in patients who had COVID-19, whereas quantitative disturbances (i.e., reduction/loss of smell/taste) have been widely investigated. Objective: To simultaneously assess the presence of both quantitative and qualitative smell/taste dysfunctions in patients who suffered from COVID-19. Methods: We enrolled 17 consecutive patients who suffered from COVID-19 over the last 6 months and 21 healthy controls, matched for sex and age. After a negative nasopharyngeal swab, the Sniffin’ Sticks Test and the Taste Strips were used to assess olfactory and taste function, respectively. At the same time, the presence of phantosmia, parosmia, phantogeusia, and parageusia was investigated with a standardized questionnaire. Results: Qualitative disturbances of smell and/or taste were found in 6/17 (35.3%) patients. Phantosmia was reported in 2/17 (11.8%) patients and parosmia in 4/17 (23.5%). There were no significant differences in smell test scores between patients who reported phantosmia and/or parosmia and patients who did not. Phantogeusia was described in 3/17 (17.6%) patients, and parageusia was identified in 4/17 (23.5%) patients. All tested patients were normogeusic. Conclusion: Around one-third of patients who recover from COVID-19 may have persistent qualitative dysfunction in smell/taste domains. Detection of phantogeusia in long-term COVID-19 patients represents a further novel finding. Further investigation is needed to better characterize the pathophysiology of phantosmia, parosmia, phantogeusia, and parageusia in patients who had COVID-19.

Variability in human olfactory sensitivity has been attributed to individual-level factors such as genetics, age, sex, medical history of infections and trauma, neurogenerative diseases, and emotional disorders. Scarce evidence exists on the cross-cultural variation in olfactory sensitivity. Hence, we performed 2 studies to estimate the variability in olfactory threshold as a function of location and environment. Study 1 involved 11 laboratories from 4 continents (N = 802). In each location, in a designated laboratory, approximately 80 subjects underwent olfactory sensitivity testing with custom-made tests with eucalyptol and phenylethanol (PEA) odors. Tests were based on the Threshold subtest of the Sniffin' Sticks battery. In Study 2, we compared olfactory sensitivity and suprathreshold perception of PEA and eucalyptol in 2 Chinese (N = 160) and 2 Indian (N = 92) populations-one based in their native country and the other in Germany. Both studies present large-scale evidence that olfactory sensitivity varies as a function of geographical location and suggest that environmental factors play an important role in shaping olfactory sensitivity and suprathreshold olfactory perception. We delineate further steps necessary to identify specific factors underlying uncovered variability and the relationship between olfactory sensitivity and suprathreshold odor perception. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).