Introduction

The Sniffin’ Sticks test battery is currently considered the best alternative for the measurement of olfactory threshold, discrimination and identification capabilities. These tests still suffer from limitations, however. Most noticeably, the olfactory threshold test is an intensive task which requires participants to smell a large number of olfactory stimuli. This proves especially problematic when measuring olfactory performance of elderly patients or screening research subjects, as sensory adaptation plays an important role in olfactory perception.

Methods

In the current study, we have determined that the cause of this limitation lies with the test’s single-staircase procedure (SSP). Consequentially, we have devised an alternative ascending limits procedure (ALP). We here compared data obtained using both procedures, following a within-subject design with 40 participants. Olfactory threshold scores as well as number of trials required to complete the two procedures were investigated.

Results

The results show that the ALP provides reliable and correct olfactory threshold ratings, as the values showed a good correlation with those obtained using the SSP and mean values did not differ significantly. Task duration, however, did show a highly significant difference, completing the SSP required participants to complete over 40% more trials compared to the ALP.

Discussion

The here presented methodological improvement can save time and, more importantly, reduce participants’ cognitive and sensory strain, which is not only more comfortable, but also limits the influence of adaptation, making any measured data more reliable.

Implications

Improving standard screening methods can directly enhance the reliability of any future study using this procedure.

中文翻译：

---

使用上升限制程序快速确定嗅觉阈值

介绍

Sniffin'S Sticks测试电池目前被认为是测量嗅觉阈值，辨别力和识别能力的最佳选择。但是，这些测试仍然存在局限性。最值得注意的是，嗅觉阈值测试是一项繁重的任务，需要参与者闻到大量的嗅觉刺激。当测量老年患者的嗅觉表现或筛选研究对象时，这被证明尤其成问题，因为感觉适应在嗅觉感知中起着重要的作用。

方法

在当前的研究中，我们已经确定此限制的原因在于测试的单楼梯程序（SSP）。因此，我们设计了一种替代的上升限制程序（ALP）。我们按照40名参与者的受试者内部设计，比较了通过这两种程序获得的数据。调查了嗅觉阈值得分以及完成这两个过程所需的试验次数。

结果

结果表明，ALP提供可靠且正确的嗅觉阈值等级，因为该值与使用SSP获得的值显示出良好的相关性，并且平均值没有显着差异。但是，任务持续时间确实显示出非常显着的差异，完成SSP要求参与者比ALP多完成40％以上的试验。

讨论区

本文介绍的方法学改进可以节省时间，更重要的是，可以减少参与者的认知和感觉疲劳，这不仅更舒适，而且还限制了适应的影响，从而使任何测量数据都更加可靠。

含义

改进标准筛选方法可以直接提高使用此程序进行的任何未来研究的可靠性。