Document Detail


Routine follow-up visits not necessary after third molar removal under sedation.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  17187035     Owner:  NLM     Status:  PubMed-not-MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
DESIGN: This was a randomised controlled trial (RCT) conducted in the US. INTERVENTION: People were recruited to the trial who required surgical removal of at least two impacted third molars under intravenous sedation on an outpatient basis. They were treated by board-certified oral and maxillofacial surgeons. Participants were divided randomly into two groups: the first was given a 2-week postoperative follow-up appointment, and the other had no follow-up. All patients received postoperative instructions and were contacted by telephone on the day after surgery. At 2 weeks postoperatively, all patients either returned to the clinic or were interviewed by telephone. OUTCOME MEASURE: Patients were asked to answer a questionnaire on postoperative day 1 and at 2 weeks after their treatment. The questionnaire was originally proposed by Worrall(1) but was modified for use in this study. RESULTS: Of the 60 consecutive patients who underwent third molar removal, only 48 were included. The mean age was 20 years (range, 15-33 years). There were no significant differences in the number of patients and gender between the groups receiving clinic or telephone follow-up. Seventy-three per cent (35 out of 48) out of all the patients preferred telephone follow-up, and 27% (13 out of 48) of patients preferred clinic follow-up. Eighty-five per cent (29 out of 34) of patients who did not have any complaints on postoperative day 1 preferred telephone follow-up (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A routine follow-up visit following third molar removal under intravenous sedation is not necessary in patients aged between 15 and 35 years. Pre-operative and postoperative instructions should be clear, however. A selective review policy may be appropriate if a patient is mentally retarded, is taking psychoactive drugs, or has an intra-operative complications or a has made a complaint via telephone.
Authors:
Gillian Ainsworth
Related Documents :
7386185 - A longterm isotope renography follow-up of patients following pregnancy complicated by ...
8496645 - Radiotherapy and complications of laryngectomy.
6939115 - Partial gastrectomy for peptic ulcer by the krønlein method. long term results 12 year...
23064425 - Scleral buckle removal in the vitrectomy era: a 20-year clinical experience.
11574345 - Epidural analgesia reduces postoperative myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis.
16021015 - Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiographic results and complicat...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comment; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Evidence-based dentistry     Volume:  7     ISSN:  1462-0049     ISO Abbreviation:  Evid Based Dent     Publication Date:  2006  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2006-12-25     Completed Date:  2007-01-17     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  100883603     Medline TA:  Evid Based Dent     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  92     Citation Subset:  -    
Affiliation:
Department of Oral Surgery, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School NHS Trust, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Comments/Corrections
Comment On:
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005 Sep;63(9):1278-82   [PMID:  16122590 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Conscious sedation guidance.
Next Document:  Chlorhexidine varnish has caries-reducing potential.