Controversies in third molar surgery — the national view on review strategies

• Published in: British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery Vol. 35; no. 5; pp. 319 - 322
• Main Authors: Pratt, C.A., Hekmat, M., Pratt, S.D., Zaki, G.A., Barnard, J.D.W.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Londonc Elsevier Ltd 01-10-1997; Elsevier
• Subjects: Age Factors; Biological and medical sciences; Dental Care - legislation & jurisprudence; Dental Care for Disabled - legislation & jurisprudence; Dentistry; Follow-Up Studies; Head and neck surgery. Maxillofacial surgery. Dental surgery. Orthodontics; Humans; Intellectual Disability; Malpractice - legislation & jurisprudence; Maxillofacial surgery. Dental surgery. Orthodontics; Medical sciences; Molar, Third - surgery; Policy Making; Postoperative Care; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Practice Patterns, Dentists' - legislation & jurisprudence; Psychotropic Drugs - therapeutic use; Safety; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases; Surgery, Oral; Surveys and Questionnaires; Tooth Extraction; United Kingdom; Human; Postoperative; Survey; Treatment; Indication; Surgery; Check; Recommendation; Third molar tooth
• ISSN: 0266-4356; 1532-1940
• DOI: 10.1016/S0266-4356(97)90403-4

A national survey was conducted to establish the current practice of postoperative review of third molar surgery by the 255 fellows of the British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Of the 216 complete responses, 134 say that they routinely reviewed all patients, while 67 did not. A further 15 fellows (7%) are currently considering their practice. Five (2%) stated that routine review should be compulsory and failure to do so was medically negligent. We conclude that a policy of selective rather than routine review is safe for most patients, but if a patient is under age, mentally retarded, taking psychoactive drugs, or has any other associated condition, then routine follow-up should be undertaken.