Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T03:20:18.252Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is electrogustometry useful for screening abnormalities of taste?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2007

E K Ellegård ,
K D Hay  and
R P Morton
E K Ellegård*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kungsbacka Hospital, Sweden
K D Hay
Affiliation:
Oral Health Unit, Green Lane Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
R P Morton
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Manukau Super Clinic, Manukau New Zealand
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Eva Ellegård, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kungsbacka Hospital, S-434 80 Kungsbacka, Sweden. Fax: +46 300 565301 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Electrogustometry is an accurate and increasingly popular method used to examine taste. However, its usefulness as a screening test is unknown.

Methods:

We asked 114 subjects, some healthy but most with medical conditions possibly affecting taste, to rate their overall taste ability, on a scale of zero to 10. Those who had current symptoms related to taste– and who rated their taste as five or worse – were defined as ‘aberrant tasters’. We recorded automated electrogustometry thresholds, and visual analogue scale intensity ratings, for solutions of the four basic tastes (sweet, sour, salty and bitter). A visual analogue scale score of 50 was used as a cut-off point to identify ‘poor tasters’.

Results:

The sensitivity and specificity of electrogustometry in identifying abnormal taste function were low.

Conclusions:

We conclude that automated electrogustometry is not a useful clinical screening method for taste disturbance in a population such as ours.

Keywords

ElectrogustometryTasteVisual Analogue ScaleSensitivitySpecificityScreening
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 121 , Issue 12 , December 2007 , pp. 1161 - 1164
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.)

References

1 Bartoshuk, L. Clinical evaluation of the sense of taste. ENT J 1989;68:331–7Google ScholarPubMed
2 Yamauchi, Y, Endo, S, Sakai, F, Yoshimura, I. A new whole-mouth gustatory test procedure. 1. Thresholds and principal components analysis in healthy men and women. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 2002;39–48CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3 Tsuruoka, S, Wakaumi, M, Araki, N, Ioka, T, Sugimoto, K, Fujimura, A. Comparative study of taste disturbance by losartan and perindopril in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 2005;45:1319–23CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4 Mueller, C, Kallert, S, Renner, B, Stiassny, K, Temmel, AF, Hummel, T et al. Quantitative assessment of gustatory function in a clinical context using impregnated ‘taste strips’. Rhinology 2003;41:2–6Google Scholar
5 Tomita, H, Ikeda, M. Clinical use of electrogustometry: strengths and limitations. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 2002;27–38CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6 Nin, T, Sakagami, M, Sone-Okunaka, M, Muto, T, Mishiro, Y, Fukazawa, K. Taste function after section of chorda tympani nerve in middle ear surgery. Auris Nasus Larynx 2006;33:13–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7 Tomofuji, S, Sakagami, M, Kushida, K, Terada, T, Mori, H, Kakibuchi, M. Taste disturbance after tonsillectomy and laryngomicrosurgery. Auris Nasus Larynx 2005;32:381–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8 Morton, RP, Hay, KD, Goldsmith, DB, Stillman, JA. Patterns of sensory recovery in the lingual nerve after surgical trauma. N Z Dent J 2005;101:53–7Google ScholarPubMed
9 Murphy, C, Quinonez, C, Nordin, S. Reliability and validity of electrogustometry and its application to young and elderly persons. Chem Senses 1995;20:499–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10 Ikui, A. A review of objective measures of gustatory function. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 2002;60–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11 Ikeda, M, Aiba, T, Ikui, A, Inokuchi, A, Kurono, Y, Sakagami, M et al. Taste disorders: a survey of the examination methods and treatments used in Japan. Acta Otolaryngol 2005;125:1203–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12 Stillman, JA, Morton, RP, Goldsmith, D. Automated electrogustometry: a new paradigm for the estimation of taste detection thresholds. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2000;25:120–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13 Stillman, JA, Morton, RP, Hay, KD, Ahmad, Z, Goldsmith, D. Electrogustometry: strengths, weaknesses, and clinical evidence of stimulus boundaries. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2003;28:406–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14 Lobb, B, Elliffe, DM, Stillman, JA. Reliability of electrogustometry for the estimation of taste thresholds. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2000;25:531–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15 Grant, R, Ferguson, MM, Strang, R, Turner, JW, Bone, I. Evoked taste thresholds in a normal population and the application of electrogustometry to trigeminal nerve disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 1987;50:12–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16 Ajdukovic, D. Electrical taste stimulus: current intensity or current density? Chem Senses 1990;15:341–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17 Ellegård, EK, Goldsmith, D, Hay, KD, Morton, RP. Studies on the relationship between electrogustometry and sour taste perception. Auris Nasus Larynx 2007 (in press)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed