Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020;22(10):36.
doi: 10.1007/s11940-020-00641-5. Epub 2020 Aug 28.

A Literature Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Symptoms Prevalence in Covid-19: the Relevance of Olfactory Symptoms in Infection Not Requiring Hospitalization

A Giorli  1 , F Ferretti  2 , C Biagini  1 , L Salerni  1 , I Bindi  1 , S Dasgupta  3   4 , A Pozza  2 , G Gualtieri  2 , R Gusinu  2 , A Coluccia  2 , Marco Mandalà  1
Affiliations
Review

A Literature Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Symptoms Prevalence in Covid-19: the Relevance of Olfactory Symptoms in Infection Not Requiring Hospitalization

A Giorli et al. Curr Treat Options Neurol. 2020.

Abstract

Purpose of review: To investigate the association between the olfactory dysfunction and the more typical symptoms (fever, cough, dyspnoea) within the Sars-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) in hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients.

Recent findings: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were reviewed from May 5, 2020, to June 1, 2020. Inclusion criteria included English, French, German, Spanish or Italian language studies containing original data related to COVID19, anosmia, fever, cough, and dyspnoea, in both hospital and non-hospital settings. Two investigators independently reviewed all manuscripts and performed quality assessment and quantitative meta-analysis using validated tools. A third author arbitrated full-text disagreements. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), 11 of 135 studies fulfilled eligibility. Anosmia was estimated less prevalent than fever and cough (respectively rate difference = - 0.316, 95% CI: - 0.574 to - 0.058, Z = - 2.404, p < 0.016, k = 11 and rate difference = - 0.249, 95% CI: - 0.402 to - 0.096, Z = - 3.185, p < 0.001, k = 11); the analysis between anosmia and dyspnoea was not significant (rate difference = - 0.008, 95% CI: - 0.166 to 0.150, Z = - 0.099, p < 0.921, k = 8). The typical symptoms were significantly more frequent than anosmia in hospitalized more critical patients than in non-hospitalized ones (respectively [Q(1) = 50.638 p < 0.000, Q(1) = 52.520 p < 0.000, Q(1) = 100.734 p < 0.000).

Summary: Patient with new onset olfactory dysfunction should be investigated for COVID-19. Anosmia is more frequent in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients than in hospitalized ones.

Keywords: COVID-19; Hospitalization; Meta-analysis; Olfactory disorders; Sars-CoV-2.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of InterestA. Giorli declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. F. Ferretti declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. C. Biagini declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. L. Salerni declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. I. Bindi declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. S. Dasgupta declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. A. Pozza declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. G. Gualtieri declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. R. Gusinu declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. A. Coluccia declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. Marco Mandalà declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flowchart of the study selection.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot of effect sizes: rate difference of anosmia vs fever.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot of effect sizes: rate difference of anosmia vs cough.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Forest plot of effect sizes: rate difference of anosmia vs dyspnoea.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot of effect sizes across studies enrolling inpatients only and studies which used mixed samples (inpatients and outpatients)—anosmia vs fever.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Forest plot of effect sizes across studies enrolling inpatients only and studies which used mixed samples (inpatients and outpatients)—anosmia vs cough.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Forest plot of effect sizes across studies enrolling inpatients only and studies which used mixed samples (inpatients and outpatients)—anosmia vs dyspnoea.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Wu Y-C, Chen C-S, Chan Y-J. The outbreak of COVID-19: an overview. J Chin Med Assoc. 2020;83(3):217–220. doi: 10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000270. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. WHO. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 11 March 2020. who.int. [Online] March 11, 2020. https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-re....
    1. Chen N, et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet. 2020;395(10,223):507–513. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wang W, Tang J, Wei F. Updated understanding of the outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in Wuhan, China. J Med Virol. 2020;92(4):441–447. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25689. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pearlman S. Another decade, another coronavirus. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(8):760–762. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe2001126. - DOI - PMC - PubMed