Key Points
-
Highlights that third molar removal is as common now as it was before the introduction of clinical guidelines.
-
Informs that NICE guidelines have altered the dynamics of third molar management with patients on average being older.
-
Stresses that dental caries associated with third molars has escalated by over 200% in a ten-year period.
-
Suggests NICE guidelines may be flawed and require review.
Abstract
Background Third molar surgery (TMS) is probably one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures undertaken in the NHS. In 2000, the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) introduced guidelines relating to TMS. These recommended against the prophylactic removal of third molars and listed specific clinical indications for surgery. The impact of these guidelines has not been fully evaluated and this research hopes to focus the effect of these guidelines over the last ten years.
Methods Using data obtained from a variety of NHS databases such as HES (Eng & Wales), the NHSBSA and data from NHS Scotland, we looked at the age range of patients requiring third molar removal and the number of patients having third molars removed in both primary and secondary care environments from 1989 to 2009. In addition we looked at the clinical indications for TMS activity in secondary care.
Findings The mean age of patients increased from 25 years in 2000 to 32 years in 2010, with the modal (most common) age increasing from 26 to 29 years. After the introduction of clinical guidelines the number of patients requiring third molar removal in secondary care dropped by over 30%, however, since 2003 the number of patients has risen by 97%. There is also a significant increase in caries as an indication for third molar removal.
Conclusions More patients are requiring third molar removal with an increasing number of patients having caries related to their third molars. Patients are, on average, older confirming that the removal of third molars is shifting from a young adult population group to an older adult population group. NICE guidelines did appear to have contributed to a fall in the volume of third molars removed within the NHS post 2000. However, concluding that this reduction demonstrates the success of NICE's guidance would be a premature assumption. The number of patients now requiring third molar removal is comparable to that of the mid 1990s. NICE has influenced the management of patients with third molars but this has not resulted in any reduction in the number of patients requiring third molar removal. Coding and data collection for third molars is not uniform, leading to potential misrepresentation of data. This perhaps raises the issue that an improved universal coding system is required for the NHS and that the NICE guidelines need review.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
World Health Organisation. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems; 10th revision (ICD-10). Geneva: WHO, 2010.
Phillips C, Norman J, Jaskolka M et al. Changes over time in position and periodontal status of retained third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 65: 2011–2017.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the extraction of wisdom teeth. London: NICE, 2000. Online article available at http://egap.evidence.nhs.uk/guidance-on-the-extraction-of-wisdom-teeth-ta1 (accessed August 2012).
NIH consensus development conference for removal of third molars. J Oral Surg 1980; 38: 235–236.
American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS). Report of a workshop on the management of patients with third molar teeth. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1994; 52: 1102–1112.
Faculty of Dental Surgery of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Current clinical practice and parameters of care: the management of patients with third molar teeth. London: Faculty of Dental Surgery RCS (Eng), 1997.
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of unerupted and impacted third molar teeth. SIGN, 1999. Online guideline available at http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign43.pdf (accessed August 2012).
Hospital Episode Statistics. HES online. Online information at www.hesonline.nhs.uk (accessed August 2012).
NHS Business Services authority. Dental Services. Digest Search. NHSBSA. Online search available at: http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/DentalServices/2876.aspx (accessed August 2012).
Statement of dental remuneration 2005. Online article available at http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/Documents/ArchivePDF/sdr93.pdf (accessed August 2012).
Sheldon T A, Cullum N, Dawson D et al. What's the evidence that NICE guidance has been implemented? Results from a national evaluation using time series analysis, audit of patients' notes, and interviews. BMJ 2004; 329: 999.
University of York. Effectiveness matters. Prophylactic removal of impacted third molars: is it justified? NHS Centre for reviews and dissemination, University of York 1998; 3.
Channel 4 Dispatches. The truth about your dentist. UK [television], 23 May 2011.
McArdle L W . Oral surgery referral patterns 2004/2005 – 2009/2010. London: Internal Service Evaluation Report, Guy's & St Thomas's NHS Foundation Trust, 2010.
Bruce R A, Frederickson G C, Small G S . Age of patients and morbidity associated with mandibular third molar surgery. J Am Dent Assoc 1980; 101: 240–245.
McArdle L W, Renton T F . Distal cervical caries in the mandibular second molar: an indication for the prophylactic removal of the third molar? Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 44: 42–45.
Chang S W, Shin S Y, Kum K Y, Hong J . Correlation study between distal caries in the mandibular second molar and the eruption status of the mandibular third molar in the Korean population. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009; 108: 838–843.
Chu F C, Li T K, Lui V K, Newsome P R, Chow R L, Cheung L K . Prevalence of impacted teeth and associated pathologies - a radiographic study of the Hong Kong Chinese population. Hong Kong Med J 2003; 9: 158–163.
Adeyemo W L, James O, Ogunlewe M O, Ladeinde A L, Taiwo O A, Olojede A C . Indications for extraction of third molars: a review of 1763 cases. Niger Postgrad Med J 2008; 15: 42–46.
van der Linden W, Cleaton-Jones P, Lownie M . Diseases and lesions associated with third molars. Review of 1001 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 79: 142–145.
Knutsson K, Brehmer B, Lysell L, Rohlin M . Pathoses associated with mandibular third molars subjected to removal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1996; 82: 10–17.
Brickley M R, Shepherd J P . An investigation of the rationality of lower third molar removal, based on USA National Institutes of Health criteria. Br Dent J 1996; 180: 249–254.
Nordenram Å, Hultin M, Kjellman O, Ramström G . Indications for surgical removal of the mandibular third molar. Study of 2,630 cases. Swed Dent J 1987; 11: 23–29.
Lysell L, Rohlin M . A study of indications used for removal of the mandibular third molar. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988; 17: 161–164.
Office for National Statistics. Adult Dental Health Survey, 1998. London: HMSO, 2000.
Office for National Statistics. Adult Dental Health Survey, 2009. London: HMSO, 2011.
Thomas D, Walker R, Smith A, Shepherd J . The provision of OS services in England and Wales 1984–1991. Br Dent J 1994; 176: 215–219.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Refereed Paper
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McArdle, L., Renton, T. The effects of NICE guidelines on the management of third molar teeth. Br Dent J 213, E8 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.780
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.780
This article is cited by
-
Parameters associated with radiographic distal surface caries in the mandibular second molar adjacent to an impacted third molar
BMC Oral Health (2023)
-
Knowledge, attitudes, and practice of non-medical students regarding impacted teeth: a cross-sectional study
Clinical Oral Investigations (2023)
-
The effect of pre-emptive ibuprofen on post-operative pain after removal of lower third molar teeth: a systematic review
Evidence-Based Dentistry (2022)
-
To prophylactically extract or not to extract partially erupted mesio-angularly impacted lower third molars?
British Dental Journal (2021)
-
Effectiveness of pre-operative oral corticosteroids in reducing pain, trismus and oedema following lower third molar extractions: a systematic review
British Dental Journal (2021)
