Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T09:10:43.729Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The superosmic phenomenon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2007

C M Philpott ,
P Goonetilleke ,
P C Goodenough ,
A Clark  and
G E Murty
C M Philpott*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Essex Rivers Healthcare NHS Trust, Colchester, UK
P Goonetilleke
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Leicester Royal Infirmary, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, UK
P C Goodenough
Affiliation:
Division of Medical Physics, University of Leicester, UK
A Clark
Affiliation:
School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
G E Murty
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Leicester Royal Infirmary, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Mr Carl M Philpott, The Cottage, Debenham Road, Middlewood Green, Stowmarket, Suffolk IP14 5EZ, UK. E-mail: carl.philpott@btinternet.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Olfaction studies in the institution of Department of Otorhinolaryngology at Leicester Royal Infirmary have detected a previously unreported, variable phenomenon – ‘superosmia’ – in which subjects' olfaction threshold concentrations are up to 100 000 smaller than the average value.

Objectives:

The aim of this report is to define and quantify this phenomenon.

Methods:

Two hundred and thirty subjects, who had been screened for active nasal pathology (age range 20–60 years), underwent individual olfactory threshold tests for phenylethyl alcohol or eucalyptol, using a computer-driven olfactometer in a controlled laboratory setting. Some tests were single tests and others were repeated on a small cohort.

Results:

Two per cent of subjects demonstrated the superosmic phenomenon on single testing, and 10 per cent demonstrated this phenomenon on variable occasions during repeated testing. The superosmic phenomenon was defined by: (1) confident olfactory perception of a threshold at least equal to if not greater than three threshold levels below the subject's average threshold; (2) repeated perception of the odour at this level for at least 10 responses (1:1024 probability of chance finding); and (3) (where time permitted) a sudden, rapid loss of superosmia.

Conclusions:

Superosmia is a distinct phenomenon, the stimulus or mechanism of which is currently the subject of further research. The enhancement of olfactory ability may be possible through activation of an accessory pathway or modulation of the existing olfactory apparatus.

Keywords

OlfactionSensory Thresholds
Type
Main Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 122 , Issue 8 , August 2008 , pp. 805 - 809
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Presented at the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, Phenyl ethyl alcohol, 20th September 2005 (AAOHNS), Los Angeles, California, USA.

References

1Deems, DA, Doty, RL, Settle, RG, Moore-Gillon, V, Shaman, P, Mester, AF et al. Smell and taste disorders, a study of 750 patients from the University of Pennsylvania Smell and Taste Center. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1991;117:519–28CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Landis, BN, Konnerth, CG, Hummel, T. A study on the frequency of olfactory dysfunction. Laryngoscope 2004;114:1764–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Nordin, S, Broman, DA, Olofsson, JK, Wulff, M. A longitudinal descriptive study of self-reported abnormal smell and taste perception in pregnant women. Chem Senses 2004;29:391–402CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Olofsson, JK, Broman, DA, Wulff, M, Martinkauppi, M, Nordin, S. Olfactory and chemosomatosensory function in pregnant women assessed with event-related potentials. Physiol Behav 2005;86:252–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Doty, RL. Olfaction and multiple chemical sensitivity. Toxicol Ind Health 1994;10:359–68CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Amoore, J. Specific hyperosmia: fact or artifact? AChems XVI Abstracts 1994;19:434Google Scholar
7Philpott, C, Goodenough, P, Robertson, A, Passant, C, Murty, G. The effect of temperature, humidity and peak inspiratory nasal flow on olfactory thresholds. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2004;29:24–31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Philpott, C, Wolstenholme, C, Goodenough, P, Clark, A, Murty, G. A comparison of subjective perception with objective measurement of olfaction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;134:488–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Doty, RL, McKeown, DA, Lee, WW, Shaman, P. A study of the test-retest reliability of ten olfactory tests. Chem Senses 1995;20:645–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Pierce, J, Doty, R, Amoore, J. Analysis of position of trial sequence and type of diluent on the detection threshold for phenyl ethyl alcohol using a single staircase method. Percept Motor Skills 1996;82:451–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Bensafi, M, Rouby, C, Farget, V, Bertrand, B, Vigouroux, M, Holley, A. Autonomic nervous system responses to odours: the role of pleasantness and arousal. Chem Senses 2002;27:703–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Philpott, C, Goodenough, P, Wolstenholme, C, Murty, G. What solvent for olfactory testing? Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2004;29:667–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Damm, M, Vent, J, Schmidt, M, Theissen, P, Eckel, HE, Lotsch, J et al. Intranasal volume and olfactory function. Chem Senses 2002;27:831–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Hummel, T. Mean values for PEA thresholds in healthy subjects. In: Philpotted, C. Professor Hummel of the Dresden Smell & Taste Clinic, 2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Lotsch, J, Lange, C, Hummel, T. A simple and reliable method for clinical assessment of odor thresholds. Chem Senses 2004;29:311–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Doty, RL, Shaman, P, Dann, M. Development of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test: a standardized microencapsulated test of olfactory function. Physiol Behav 1984;32:489–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17Gaskin, J, Robinson, A, Philpott, C, Goodenough, P, Clark, A, Murty, G. Does odour cross contamination alter olfactory thresholds in certain odours? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007;135(S2):76Google Scholar
18Robinson, AM, Gaskin, JA, Philpott, CM, Goodenough, PC, Elloy, M, Clark, A et al. What is the short term effect of perfumes on olfactory thresholds? J Laryngol Otol 2007;121:755–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Philpott, CM, Wolstenholme, CR, Goodenough, PC, Clark, A, Murty, GE. Which variables matter in smell tests in the clinic? J Laryngol Otol 2007;121:952–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Trinh, K, Storm, DR. Vomeronasal organ detects odorants in absence of signaling through main olfactory epithelium. Nat Neurosci 2003;6:519–25CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Rabin, MD, Cain, WS. Determinants of measured olfactory sensitivity. Perception & Psychophysics 1986;39:281–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed