SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Dysosmia Is a Predictor of Motor Function and Quality of Life in Patients with Parkinson's Disease.

J Pers Med · 2022-05-06

DOI: 10.3390/jpm12050754PMID: 35629176

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

(1) Background: The correlation between dysosmia with quality of life (QoL) in patients with PD was rarely reported. The study aimed to examine the effect of dysosmia on motor function and QoL in PD. (2) Methods: This cross-sectional study, performed between October 2016 and February 2021, recorded the traditional Chinese version of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS UPDRS), and the 39-item Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) in patients with PD. UPSIT = 19 was applied to separate the total anosmia and non-anosmia groups. (3) Results: 243 patients with PD were recruited. The total anosmia group had higher MDS UPDRS total, part II, and part III scores than the non-anosmia group. They also had worse scores on the dimensions of activities of daily living (ADL) and cognition of the PDQ-39 than the non-anosmia group. The UPSIT score correlated MDS UPDRS part III score (p < 0.0001), PDQ-39 ADL quartile (p = 0.0202), and Dopamine transporter scan (p = 0.0082) in the linear regression. (4) Conclusions: Dysosmia in PD predicted a phenotype with defective motor function, ADL, and cognition QoL. The findings supported the olfactory transmission of α-synuclein to the cortices, substantia nigra.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.