Study subjects
Study participants were recruited through the Ophthalmology Department and Neurology Department at the University Hospital Greifswald before January 2020. Inclusion criteria for BSP subjects were standardized criteria for idiopathic BSP without evidence of a different neurological illness and/or other causes of involuntary lid closure (Defazio and Livrea 2004; Defazio et al. 2017). Healthy subjects matched for age, sex, education, and handedness of the BSP subjects were included as healthy controls. The exclusion criteria were chosen, so that no other neurological disease and no disorder of the peripheral olfactory and gustatory system could influence the test results. Exclusion criteria applied to both groups were a score below 26 in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (Freitas et al. 2012), post-infectious olfactory dysfunction, post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction, olfactory dysfunction secondary to sinonasal disease, congenital olfactory dysfunction, idiopathic olfactory dysfunction, any history of or current radiation and chemotherapy, past or present tobacco smoking, use of central nervous system (CNS) active medication, anatomical deformities or pathologies of the mouth, ear and nose, medical or surgical conditions which could impede smell or taste, as well as history of head trauma, abnormal findings on routine neuroimaging studies and abnormal findings on laboratory work-up done for routine care (Jankovic and Orman 1987; Heckmann et al. 2003; Doty 2019). Also, excluded from the study were subjects taking medication or who were under exposure to toxins which cause dysfunction of the chemical senses (Hummel et al. 2016; Doty 2019; Kronenbürger and Pilgramm 2020).
After approval of the study protocol by the local ethics board, all subjects with the diagnosis of blepharospasm who presented to the Department of Ophthalmology and to the Department of Neurology outpatient clinics between January 2015 and January 2020 were identified in the hospital electronic record system of the University Hospital Greifswald. Thereafter, using the available health information in the hospital electronic medical records system, the inclusion and exclusion criteria were checked in the identified subjects with blepharospasms. In the following step, the remaining subjects with blepharospasms who met the inclusion criteria and did not have any exclusion criteria were mailed a letter about the study and—if they were interested to voluntarily participate in the study—invited to contact the study investigators. Subjects with BSP who showed interest and who contacted the study investigators were interviewed over the phone if they met the inclusion criteria and if they had no exclusion criteria. Thereafter, respective BSP subjects obtained an appointment for the study, where they were examined and once more interviewed in regards to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Subjects with BSP who met the inclusion criteria and did not have any exclusion criteria were considered to have idiopathic BSP.
Healthy controls were recruited by flyers, which were distributed at the Department of Ophthalmology and at the Department of Neurology outpatient clinics. As with the subjects with idiopathic BSP, healthy controls interested to participate in the study and who called the study investigators were interviewed over the phone and scheduled for an appointment for the study if they met the inclusion criteria and if they did not have any exclusion criteria. Other selection criteria were that the healthy controls matched age, sex, education, and handedness of the subjects with BSP. At the study appointment, healthy controls were examined and again interviewed regarding the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
As we wanted to assess olfactory abilities in a cohort of subjects with idiopathic BSP, subjective olfactory decline was neither an inclusion nor an exclusion criterion for subjects with BSP or healthy controls. Thus, for screening and subsequent recruitment for this study, study participants were not inquired about their subjective olfactory functioning before entering the study. Once the study participants were included in the study, they were asked about their subjective rating of their olfactory abilities and their gustatory abilities (please see “Clinical interview, exam, and scores”).
Clinical interview, exam, and scores
In addition to clinical chart review, demographic as well as clinical data were collected during the in-person interview. A neurological exam in all study subjects was performed by a fellowship-trained, senior movement disorders neurologist (MK). The Jankovic Ratings Scale (JRS) (Jankovic and Orman 1987) and the Blepharospasm Severity Rating Scale (BSRS) (Defazio et al. 2015) were applied to assess BSP. To assess cognitive and psychiatric alterations that could potentially impede the chemical senses (Hedner et al. 2010; Kamath et al. 2018), the protocol included the MoCA (Freitas et al. 2012), the Trail-Making-Test (Brown et al. 1958), the Digit-Span-Test (de Paula et al. 2016), the FAS-Test (Machado et al. 2009), and the Brief Symptom Inventory (Franke 2000). All participants were examined in a well-rested state. An anterior rhinoscopy, as well as a clinical exam of the oral cavity were performed on all participants to exclude any conditions which could cause impairment of the chemical senses. BSP subjects on BoNT treatment were assessed three months after their last treatment when the effects of BoNT had wasted. To assess saliva production, the study participants were asked to place two cotton swabs in their check pouch for 1 min. The weight of the cotton swabs was measured before and after the subjects had them in their mouth.
All study participants were asked to gauge their overall olfactory ability (= subjective olfactory ability rating) and their overall gustatory ability (= subjective gustatory rating) on a scale from 0 (absent) to 10 (superb) before the beginning of the Sniffin Sticks and Taste Stripe test as described below.
An adjacent study assessed the effects of BoNT treatment on the chemical senses. BSP subjects currently treated with BoNT were either examined right before their next BoNT injections and then examined 4 weeks thereafter, or they were examined in reverse order. The BoNT treatment was applied consistent with standard injection protocols, in standard doses with four-to-six injection sites per eye (Hassell and Charles 2020). To document the effects of BoNT treatment, the JRS was done right before the BoNT injections and 4 weeks thereafter. Self-assessment of the effects of BoNT in the BSP subjects was done using the Global Assessment Score (Wabbels et al. 2011). Using this scale, the BSP subjects were asked to rate the response to BoNT treatment from − 4 to + 4 (“− 4” indicated marked worsening of symptoms, “0” no change, and “+ 4” marked improvement of symptoms). For comparison, matched healthy controls were assessed twice, 4 weeks apart but without BoNT treatment.
Olfactory testing
The participants' sense of smell was assessed using Sniffin Sticks (Hummel et al. 1997). These included three subtests for odor threshold, odor identification, and odor discrimination. The Sniffin Sticks have the shape of a pen and a removable cap. The participants were requested not to eat or use chewing gum an hour before the examination. Taking sips of water was allowed for the participants. To prevent visual identification, all study participants were tested blindfolded. For olfactory testing, the cap of the Sniffin Sticks pen was removed and the pen was presented under the nostrils for 3 s. Sufficient breaks were made between the presentation of the pens.
To assess the odor threshold, 16 triplets were used. Each triplet consisted of one pen, which contained the odorant n-butanol in different dilutions, and two pens which contained an odorless solvent. Thus, the odor threshold test of the Sniffin Sticks had 16 sticks, which contained n-butanol. The Sniffin Sticks pen with the highest concentration of the odorant had an n-butanol concentration of 4%. The difference between the n-butanol dilution in the different pens which contained the odorant was stepwise with a ratio of 1:2 per step. At the beginning of the test, the study participants were offered the pen with the highest concentration of the odorant, so that they could familiarize themselves with the fragrance. Thereafter, the triplet with the lowest odor concentration was presented. The three pens of a triplet were presented in alternating order. In a forced-choice procedure (AFC-procedure), the subjects were instructed to decide in which pen they had perceived a fragrance. In case the study participants were uncertain, they had to guess the answer. If the participants gave an incorrect answer, the triplet with the next higher concentration was presented until the study participants gave the correct answer. If the participants gave the correct answer during the first attempt, the triplet with the same concentration was offered to them again. When subjects had again chosen the correct pen, the test continued with the next lower concentration. This was done until the participants gave an incorrect answer, and then, the concentration was increased. The change between increasing and decreasing concentration (or vice versa) resulted in turning points. Results were documented on a documentation sheet. A total of seven turning points were determined, with the last four being considered for evaluation. The mean was calculated from these four turning points. This mean value indicated the olfactory threshold concentration of the study participants and could take values between zero (absent) and 16 (excellent). Thus, a low number in the odor threshold test also called “low odor threshold” indicated a worse or an impaired odor threshold. For example, if the group of subjects with idiopathic BSP had a lower odor threshold than the group of healthy controls, the odor threshold of subjects with BSP was deemed worse than the odor threshold of healthy controls.
For the assessment of odor discrimination, 16 triplets were used. A triplet included two pens with the same odor and one pen with a different odorant. The participants had to identify the stick with the different fragrances during this examination. The participants could achieve a maximum of 16 points. A lower score in the odor discrimination test indicated a worse performance than did a higher score.
Odor identification was assessed with 16 pens. These had different fragrances that represented known smells; for example, orange, leather, coffee, or garlic. After one pen was presented, four predetermined answer options were read out to the participants and they had to indicate which of the four was most likely the correct answer. The correct answers were noted and added at the end of the examination. Similar to the other tests, a maximum total of 16 points was possible. A lower score in the odor identification test indicated a worse performance than did a higher score.
The three Sniffin Sticks subtests (odor threshold, odor discrimination, and odor identification) were added to the composite olfactory score. Results with low cores indicated worse performance than did high scores. For example, a lower score of the Sniffin Sticks test in the group of subjects with BSP than in the group of healthy controls indicated that the result of the group of subjects with idiopathic BSP was worse than the result of the healthy controls. A composite olfactory score of lower than 30 was considered as hyposmia (Haehner et al. 2009).
Gustatory testing
The Taste Strips were used for the assessment of the composite taste scores (Mueller et al. 2003). Each taste strip was impregnated with one of the four flavors in four different concentrations. The four flavors were "sweet", "sour", "salty", or "bitter". There were also two strips without taste, the so-called “blanks”. The participants were presented the 18 strips in a predetermined order based on increasing flavor concentration, but the four flavors were presented in randomized order. Sufficient breaks were provided, and the participants were asked to drink some water regularly in between tastes, to avoid falsifying the results. In a forced-choice procedure, the participants were requested to indicate which taste they noticed. To evaluate the test, the number of correct answers was added (max. 16 points). The results of the two blanks were not recorded. A lower score in the Taste Stripe test indicated a worse performance than did a higher score. A composite taste score of lower than 9 was considered as hypogeusia (Mueller et al. 2003).
Statistics
SPSS Statistics 25 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used. The exact Mann–Whitney U test and Fisher’s test were used, since sample sizes were low and non-parametric tests are less likely to be affected by outliers. In the case of statistically significant differences between BSP subjects and healthy controls, multiple linear regression analysis was performed to assess whether clinical characteristics of BSP predicted performance on the tests of the chemical sense. Factors included were age, sex, education, disease duration of BSP, BoNT treatment, JRS, presence of tremor, saliva production, performance on the cognitive tests, as well as BSI depression and anxiety sub-scores. The critical p value was set to 0.05.
The study was approved by the local ethics committee (BB 004/19) and was performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. All study participants gave their informed consent before their inclusion in the study.