Close Window
Aetna Aetna
Clinical Policy Bulletin:
Smell and Taste Disorders: Diagnosis
Number: 0390


Policy

  1. Aetna considers certain procedures/services medically necessary for the evaluations of members with unexplained olfactory dysfunction (e.g., anosmia, hyposmia, dysosmia) and gustatory dysfunction (e.g., ageusia, hypogeusia, dysgeusia):

    1. Biopsy of the olfactory mucosa
    2. Drug assays and chemical analyses when certain medications or nutritional deficiencies are the suspected causes of the disorders
    3. Electroencephalography (EEG) for members with a history of seizures
    4. Hematological tests (e.g., hematocrit count, hemoglobin level, white blood cell count, urea nitrogen level, creatinine level, glucose level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, eosinophil count, and immunoglobulin E level)
    5. Medical evaluation (complete medical history and physical examination)
    6. Nasal endoscopy
    7. Neuroimaging with computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to rule out an intra-cranial or peripheral nerve abnormality
    8. Neurological consultation
    9. Otolaryngological consultation
    10. Psychiatrical consultation
    11. Standard taste tests such as Taste-Threshold Test (also known as Whole-Mouth Taste-Threshold Test), Taste-Suprathreshold Test, Taste-Quadrant Test, and Flavor Discrimination Test (for evaluation of both taste and smell sensation)
    12. Standardized olfactory tests such as the UPSIT or “Sniffin' Sticks”, the University of Connecticut Test Battery, the Pocket Smell Test, or the Brief Smell Identification Test. Other tests include Smell-Threshold Test, Smell-Suprathreshold Test, and Smell Unilateral Test.  For use of olfactory testing in Parkinson disease, see CPB 0307 - Parkinson's Disease 
    13. Thyroid function studies.

    Note: An initial and follow-up visit is considered medically necessary for smell and/or taste dysfunction testing.  Additional visits for testing are considered not medically necessary.

    Note: Members with taste loss may need smell testing in addition to taste testing.

  2. Aetna considers the following services as a means of diagnosing an unexplained olfactory dysfunction experimental and investigational because the peer-reviewed medical literature does not support the use of these studies for this indication:

    1. Electrogustometry
    2. Olfactometry 
    3. Olfactory and gustatory event potentials (see CPB 0181 - Evoked Potential Studies)
    4. Positron emission tomography (PET) (see CPB 0071 - Positron Emission Tomography (PET))
    5. Rhinomanometry (see CPB 0700 - Rhinometry and Rhinomanometry)
    6. Rhinometry (also known as acoustic rhinometry) (see CPB 0700 - Rhinometry and Rhinomanometry)
    7. Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) (see CPB 0376 - Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT))


Background

Normal olfactory and gustatory functioning plays a key role in nutrition and food selection, and thus is important for the maintenance of a good quality of life.  Smell and taste are closely inter-related.  An impairment of the function of one sense often affects the function of the other sense.  In fact, complaints of gustatory loss usually reflect smell rather than taste dysfunction.  Deficits in these senses not only can reduce the pleasure and comfort from food, but can also lead to food poisoning or over-exposure to environmentally hazardous agents that are otherwise detectable by smell and taste.

More than 2 millions Americans suffer from smell and taste disorders.  Olfactory dysfunction is more common than gustatory dysfunction because of the vulnerability and anatomical distinctiveness of the olfactory system, and because a decline in olfactory function is part of the normal aging process.  Common olfactory and gustatory disturbances could be the consequence of a variety of medications, upper respiratory infections, nasal and paranasal sinus diseases, depression, hypothyroidism, and damage to peripheral nerves supplying smell and taste.  In particular, inflammation (nasal and sinus disease), viral infection, and head trauma are the most frequent causes of smell disorders; while oral and perioral infections (e.g., gingivitis and candidiasis), oral appliances (e.g., dentures and filling materials), dental procedures and Bell's palsy are the most common causes of taste disorders.

Anosmia refers to an absence of the smell sensation; hyposmia is defined as reduced sensitivity to odorants (odor stimuli), and dysosmia refers to an altered perception of smell.  Dysosmia can be further classified into phantosmia (a perception of an odor without the stimulus present) and parosmia or troposmia (an altered perception of an odor with a stimulus present).

Ageusia refers to an absence of the taste sensation; hypogeusia is defined as reduced sensitivity to tastants (taste stimuli), and dysgeusia refers to an altered perception to taste with or without the presence of a tastant.

A careful medical history of systemic illnesses and medication use as well as a thorough physical examination are essential for the diagnosis of smell and taste disorders.  Work-up should not commence until a standardized test such as the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) or the University of Connecticut Test Battery has been given to establish impairment of the sense of smell.  The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) is an objective, quantitative test of olfactory function.  The test consists of 40 odors, each of which is microencapsulated on a pad that, one at a time, the patient scratches with a pencil and sniffs.  The patient is provided with a list of 4 choices for each pad, and from which the correct answer must be chosen or a guess made.  It has been demonstrated that there is good correlation between UPSIT and other olfactory function tests such as the T&T olfactometer threshold test, Cain's odor identification test, and Le Nez du Vin-derived smell identification test.  Furthermore, it has been reported that the UPSIT and its 10-, 20-, and 30-item fragments have very high internal consistency reliability.

The recent practice parameter on diagnosis and prognosis of new onset Parkinson disease by the American Academy of Neurology (Suchowersky et al, 2006) stated that olfactory testing using either the UPSIT or “Sniffin' Sticks” should be considered to differentiate progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal degeneration from Parkinson's disease.

Nasal mucous membranes should be examined for abnormal conditions.  Biopsy is necessary if intra-nasal or intra-oral neoplasm is suspected to be the cause of the dysfunction.  Furthermore, intra-nasal biopsy is also helpful in diagnosing post-upper respiratory infection-induced olfactory loss.  Drug assays, chemical analyses and thyroid function studies may be necessary since distortion of chemosensory sensations are associated with the use of certain medications (e.g., anti-depressants and anti-convulsants, anti-psychotics, anti-hypertensives and cardiac medications, lipid-lowering agents, and anti-Parkinsonian agents), nutritional deficiency (e.g., zinc deficiency), and thyroid disease.

Neuroimaging such as CT or MRI may be necessary to rule out intra-cranial or peripheral nerve abnormalities.  Computed tomography is useful in imaging the nasal and sinus cavities, skull base, olfactory cleft, nasopharynx, parotid, oropharynx, neck, and mandible.  Bone abnormalities and widening of cranial nerve foramina are best observed with CT.  Magnetic resonance imaging is useful in evaluating the olfactory bulbs, ventricles, other soft tissues in the brain, soft tissues of the tongue, tongue base, blood vessels and nerves in the skull base and neck.  Studies such as SPECT and PET do not play a significant role in the diagnosis of olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions.  Patients with a history of seizure disorder should be referred for EEG.  Otolaryngological, neurological, and psychiatrical consultation may be necessary if the underlying cause of the olfactory/gustatory dysfunction is diagnosed as a condition, which may require further evaluation and treatment, by a specialist in such discipline.

Ellegard and colleagues (2007) examined if electrogustometry is useful for screening abnormalities of taste.  These investigators asked 114 subjects, some healthy but most with medical conditions possibly affecting taste, to rate their overall taste ability, on a scale of 0 to 10.  Those who had current symptoms related to taste, and who rated their taste as 5 or worse were defined as "aberrant tasters".  These researchers recorded automated electrogustometry thresholds, and visual analog scale intensity ratings, for solutions of the four basic tastes (sweet, sour, salty and bitter).  A visual analog scale score of 50 was used as a cut-off point to identify "poor tasters".  The sensitivity and specificity of electrogustometry in identifying abnormal taste function were low.  The authors concluded that automated electrogustometry is not a useful clinical screening method for taste disturbance in this group of subjects.

There is insufficient scientific evidence to support the usefulness of olfactory evoked potentials, olfactometry, rhinometry, rhinomanometry, or electrogustometry in the diagnosis of smell and taste disorders.

 
CPT Codes / HCPCS Codes / ICD-9 Codes
CPT codes covered if selection criteria are met:
30100
31231
70450
70460
70470
70496
70551
70552
70553
82565
82947
84443
84520
85014
85018
85032
85048
85651 - 85652
86003
CPT codes not covered for indications listed in the CPB:
78607
78608
92512
Other CPT codes related to the CPB:
31233
31235
31237
80150 - 80202
84630
92511
95816 - 95819
ICD-9 codes covered if selection criteria are met:
781.1 Disturbances of sensation of smell and taste
Other ICD-9 codes related to the CPB:
112.0 Candidiasis of mouth
139.8 Late effects of other and unspecified infectious and parasitic diseases
240.0 - 246.9 Disorders of thyroid gland
269.0 - 269.9 Other nutritional deficiencies
300.11 Conversion disorder
306.7 Physiological malfunction arising from mental factors, in organs of special sense
351.0 - 352.9 Facial nerve disorders and disorders of other cranial nerves
523.10 - 523.11 Chronic gingivitis
905.0 Late effect of fracture of skull and face bones
906.0 Late effect of open wound of head, neck, and trunk
907.0 Late effect of intracranial injury without mention of skull fracture
951.8 Injury to other specified cranial nerves
V41.5 Problems with smell and taste
V79.8 Special screening for specified mental disorders and developmental handicaps
V80.0 Special screening for neurological conditions


The above policy is based on the following references:
  1. Kondo H, Matsuda T, Hashiba M, Baba S. A study of the relationship between the T&T olfactometer and the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test in a Japanese population. Am J Rhinol. 1998;12(5):353-358.
  2. Downey LL, Jacobs JB, Lebowitz RA. Anosmia and chronic sinus disease. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996;115(1):24-28.
  3. McMahon C, Scadding GK. Le Nez du Vin -- a quick test of olfaction. Clin Otolaryngol 1996;21(3):278-280.
  4. Doty RL, Frye RE, Agrawal U. Internal consistency reliability of the fractionated and whole University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test. Percept Psychophys. 1989;45(5):381-384.
  5. Doty RL Shaman P, Kimmelman CP, Dann MS. University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Smell Test: A rapid quantitative of olfactory function test for the clinic. Laryngoscope. 1984;94(2 Pt 1):176-178.
  6. Ballenger JJ. Clinical anatomy and physiology of the nose and paranasal sinuses. In: Otolaryngology: Head and Neck Surgery. 15th ed. JJ Ballenger, JB Snow, Jr, eds. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1996; Ch. 1: 3-18.
  7. Bromley SM. Smell and taste disorders: A primary care approach. Am Fam Physician. 2000;61(2):427-436, 438.
  8. Cullen MM, Leopold DA. Disorders of smell and taste. Med Clin North Am. 1999;83(1):57-74.
  9. Spielman AI. Chemosensory function and dysfunction. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1998;9(3):267-291.
  10. Schiffman SS. Taste and smell losses in normal aging and disease. JAMA. 1997;278(16):1357-1362.
  11. Davidson TM, Murphy C, Jalowayski AA. Smell impairment. Can it be reversed? Postgrad Med. 1995;98(1):107-109, 112-118.
  12. Hill DP, Jafek BW. Initial otolaryngologic assessment of patients with taste and smell disorders. Ear Nose Throat J. 1989;68(5):362, 365-366, 368, passim.
  13. Riechelmann H, O'Connell JM, Rheinheimer MC, et al. The role of acoustic rhinometry in the diagnosis of adenoidal hypertrophy in pre-school children. Eur J Pediatr. 1999;158(1):38-41.
  14. Kim CS, Moon BK, Jung DH, Min YG. Correlation between nasal obstruction symptoms and objective parameters of acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry. Auri Nasus Larynx. 1998;25(1):45-48.
  15. Tai CF, Ho KY, Hasegawa M. Evaluating the sensation of nasal obstruction with acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry. Kao Hsiung I Hsueh Ko Hsueh Tsa Chih. 1998;14(9):548-553.
  16. Reber M, Rahm F, Monnier P. The role of acoustic rhinometry in the pre- and postoperative evaluation of surgery for nasal obstruction. Rhinology. 1998;36(4):184-187.
  17. Yaniv E, Hadar T, Shvero J, Raveh E. Objective and subjective nasal airflow. Am J Otolaryngol. 1997;18(1):29-32.
  18. Goodspeed RB, Gent JF, Catalanotto FA. Chemosensory dysfunction. Clinical evaluation results from a taste and smell clinic. Postgrad Med. 1987;81(1):251-257, 260.
  19. Mann NM. Management of smell and taste problems. Cleve Clin J Med. 2002;69(4):329-336.
  20. Tomita H, Ikeda M. Clinical use of electrogustometry: Strengths and limitations. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 2002;(546):27-38.
  21. Lobb B, Elliffe DM, Stillman JA. Reliability of electrogustometry for the estimation of taste thresholds. Clin Otolaryngol. 2000;25(6):531-534.
  22. Wrobel BB, Leopold DA. Clinical assessment of patients with smell and taste disorders. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2004;37(6):1127-1142.
  23. Suchowersky O, Reich S, Perlmutter J, et al. Practice parameter: Diagnosis and prognosis of new onset Parkinson disease (an evidence-based review). Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2006;66:968-975.
  24. Ellegård EK, Hay KD, Morton RP. Is electrogustometry useful for screening abnormalities of taste? J Laryngol Otol. 2007;121(12):1161-1164.
  25. Kranick SM, Duda JE. Olfactory dysfunction in Parkinson's disease. Neurosignals. 2008;16(1):35-40.
  26. Herting B, Bietenbeck S, Scholz K, et al. Olfactory dysfunction in Parkinson's disease: Its role as a new cardinal sign in early and differential diagnosis. Nervenarzt. 2008;79(2):175-184.
  27. Mueller CA, Khatib S, Naka A, et al. Clinical assessment of gustatory function before and after middle ear surgery: A prospective study with a two-year follow-up period. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2008;117(10):769-773.
  28. Schuster B, Iannilli E, Gudziol V, Landis BN. Gustatory testing for clinicians. B-ENT. 2009;5 Suppl 13:109-113.
  29. Epstein JB, Barasch A. Taste disorders in cancer patients: Pathogenesis, and approach to assessment and management. Oral Oncol. 2010;46(2):77-81.
  30. Steinbach S, Hundt W, Zahnert T, et al. Gustatory and olfactory function in breast cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2010;18(6):707-713.
  31. Lang CJ, Schwandner K, Hecht M. Do patients with motor neuron disease suffer from disorders of taste or smell? Amyotroph Lateral Scler. 2011;12(5):368-371.
  32. Goldzak-Kunik G, Friedman R, Spitz M, et al. Intact sensory function in anorexia nervosa. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012;95(2):272-282.
  33. Fasunla JA, Hundt W, Lutz J, et al. Evaluation of smell and taste in patients with Wegener's granulomatosis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012;269(1):179-186.


email this page   


Copyright Aetna Inc. All rights reserved. Clinical Policy Bulletins are developed by Aetna to assist in administering plan benefits and constitute neither offers of coverage nor medical advice. This Clinical Policy Bulletin contains only a partial, general description of plan or program benefits and does not constitute a contract. Aetna does not provide health care services and, therefore, cannot guarantee any results or outcomes. Participating providers are independent contractors in private practice and are neither employees nor agents of Aetna or its affiliates. Treating providers are solely responsible for medical advice and treatment of members. This Clinical Policy Bulletin may be updated and therefore is subject to change.
Aetna
Back to top