Other
Global practices in paediatric olfactory dysfunction: a cross-sectional survey of paediatric ENT surgeons
Spencer GM, Karim K, Dzioba A, Graham ME, You P et al. ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This is a survey of paediatric ear, nose, and throat surgeons about how they diagnose and manage olfactory dysfunction (loss of smell) in children. While the abstract mentions that olfactory problems can affect nutrition and development, the document itself is a clinical practice survey focused on medical diagnostic procedures and professional training gaps rather than child well-being outcomes or interventions to improve children's health or development.
Key points
- 83% of surveyed surgeons reported seeing children with olfactory dysfunction, but 95% saw fewer than ten patients annually
- 54.8% of respondents never performed psychophysical testing for smell
- 88.4% of respondents routinely ordered cross-sectional imaging
- Main barriers to objective testing were insufficient training (44.3%), time constraints (29.9%), and funding limitations (28.1%)
- Significant regional variation in practice patterns was observed
Limitations
This is a survey of medical practitioners' reported practices, not an evaluation of interventions or measurement of child outcomes. The document cannot tell us whether current diagnostic approaches actually improve children's health, nutrition, or quality of life.
Abstract
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.