Global practices in paediatric olfactory dysfunction: a cross-sectional survey of paediatric ENT surgeons
Spencer, G. M.; Karim, K.; Dzioba, A.; Graham, M. E.; You, P.; Hummel, T.; Gellrich, J.; Coyle, P.; Burns, H.; Peer, S.; Zawawi, F.; Lechien, J. R.; Schriever, V. A.; Bhargava, E. K.; Whitcroft, K. L.
Show abstract
Background: Olfactory dysfunction (OD) in children remains underdiagnosed and poorly characterised. Despite its known impacts on nutrition, quality of life, safety awareness, and psychosocial development, no standardised diagnostic or management pathway currently exists for paediatric OD. This study aimed to characterise global practice patterns and identify diagnostic and therapeutic challenges unique to paediatric care. Methodology/Principal: A 44-item cross-sectional online survey was distributed to a verified international network of paediatric otolaryngologists across 36 countries via a closed professional platform. The survey assessed five domains: diagnostic practices, management protocols, technology and innovation, education and training, and barriers to effective care. Regional grouping was used to facilitate meaningful statistical comparisons. Categorical variables were evaluated using chi-square tests, with odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals reported for significant findings. Results: Of 351 potential participants, 167 responded (47.6% response rate). Most respondents (83%) reported seeing children with OD, yet 95% saw fewer than ten such patients annually. Psychophysical testing was never performed by 54.8% of respondents, while 88.4% routinely ordered cross-sectional imaging. Testing frequency increased significantly with patient age (Cochran's Q p<0.001). The most common barriers to objective testing were insufficient training (44.3%), time constraints (29.9%), and funding limitations (28.1%). Multidisciplinary collaboration was negligible. Significant regional variation was observed across most practice domains. Conclusions: Paediatric OD care is characterised by functional underinvestigation, fragmented multidisciplinary collaboration, and systemic educational gaps. These findings support urgent development of standardised clinical guidelines, age-appropriate validated assessment tools, and formal interdisciplinary care pathways.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A Comparative Survey of Functional Evidence Use in Hearing and Vision Loss Genetics 89%
- The antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 increases over 5 months in patients with anosmia/dysgeusia 88%
- A longitudinal seroprevalence study in a large cohort of working adults reveals that neutralising SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific antibodies persist for at least six months independent of the severity of symptoms 88%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Olfactory Training Efficiency In Post-COVID-19 Persistent Olfactory Disorders 93%
- COVID-19 in Children with Down Syndrome: Data from the Trisomy 21 Research Society Survey 91%
- A systematic review of persistent symptoms and residual abnormal functioning following acute COVID-19: Ongoing symptomatic phase vs. post-COVID-19 syndrome 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- High prevalence of olfactory disorders 18 months after contracting COVID-19 92%
- UK and US risk factors for hearing loss in neonatal intensive care unit infants 91%
- Mind the gap: Mapping Variation between National and Local Clinical Practice Guidelines for Acute Paediatric Asthma from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Post-COVID syndrome prevalence and risk factors in children and adolescents: A population-based serological study 90%
- The potential health and economic impact of dexamethasone treatment for patients with COVID-19 88%
- Post-acute symptoms, new onset diagnoses and health problems 6 to 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a nationwide questionnaire study in the adult Danish population 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.