Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Dec;15(4):171-81.
doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2015.10.001. Epub 2015 Nov 19.

Appropriate Recall Interval for Periodontal Maintenance: A Systematic Review

Affiliations

Appropriate Recall Interval for Periodontal Maintenance: A Systematic Review

Owais A Farooqi et al. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2015 Dec.

Erratum in

Abstract

Objectives: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to assess the evidence to support a specific time interval between periodontal maintenance (PM) visits.

Methods: Relevant articles were identified through searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed using specific search terms, until April, 2014, resulting in 1095 abstracts and/or titles with possible relevance. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) guidelines were used to evaluate the strength of studies and synthesize findings. If mean recall interval was not reported for study groups, authors were contacted to attempt to retrieve this information.

Results: Eight cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. No randomized control trials were found. All included studies assessed the effect of PM recall intervals in terms of compliance with a recommended regimen (3-6 months) as a primary outcome. Shorter PM intervals (3-6 months) favored more teeth retention but also statistically insignificant differences between RC and IC/EC, or converse findings are also found. In the 2 studies reporting mean recall interval in groups, significant tooth loss differences were noted as the interval neared the 12 month limit.

Conclusions: Evidence for a specific recall interval (e.g. every 3 months) for all patients following periodontal therapy is weak. Further studies, such as RCTs or large electronic database evaluations would be appropriate. The merits of risk-based recommendations over fixed recall interval regimens should be explored.

Keywords: Dental prophylaxis; Patient compliance; Periodontal diseases; Periodontal maintenance; Supportive periodontal therapy; Systematic review; Tooth loss.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow of information through different phases of systematic review.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. American Academy of Periodontology . Glossary of Periodontal Terms. 4th ed. American Academy of Periodontology; Chicago: 2001. p. 39.
    1. Hirschfeld L, Wasserman B. A long-term survey of tooth loss in 600 treated periodontal patients. J Periodontol. 1978 May;49(5):225–37. - PubMed
    1. McFall WT., Jr Tooth loss in 100 treated patients with periodontal disease. A long-term study. J Periodontol. 1982 Sep;53(9):539–49. - PubMed
    1. Lindhe J, Nyman S. Long-term maintenance of patients treated for advanced periodontal disease. J Clin Periodontol. 1984 Sep;11(8):504–14. - PubMed
    1. Wilson TG, Jr, Glover ME, Schoen J, Baus C, Jacobs T. Compliance with maintenance therapy in a private periodontal practice. J Periodontol. 1984 Aug;55(8):468–73. - PubMed

Publication types