This seminal paper by the late Professor Aubrey Sheiham was published in February 1980, a time of major political and social change in the UK. Margaret Thatcher was still settling into Downing Street as the new Prime Minister, The Specials topped the charts and the miners' strike was due to start in a few years' time. This concise paper questioning the evidence base for six-monthly dental examinations, a follow-up to a 1977 Lancet publication, was highly controversial when it was published in the British Dental Journal. Indeed, at this time, Sheiham was considered by many as a bête noire figure in dentistry. By publicly challenging the lack of evidence underpinning the routine six-month recall interval, the foundation of modern dentistry, he was seen by many as a traitor to his profession.
Re-reading the paper 42 years after it was first published, it is remarkable just how accurate the predictions were. We now know much more on the progression rates of caries lesions, the limited value of routine scale and polishes on periodontal health, and the need to adopt a risk-based approach to determining the frequency of recall intervals. The evidence base for recall intervals has developed considerably over the last four decades through high-quality research, including randomised controlled trials such as the INTERVAL trial, systematic reviews and NICE guidance. Indeed, the 2004 NICE guidelines very much endorsed the views expressed by Sheiham on the limitations of six-month recalls for all adults and instead highlighted the need for a more nuanced approach based on disease risk, social background and treatment history.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution