Should dental radiography be mandatory?

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

James Dunne — Mon, 18 May 2026 20:11:16 GMT

Hi David

I'm coming to this discussion late. What do I think? I think if everything was free, dental radiography would be used all the time. It's not, so it isn't. Is it very helpful? Yes. Is it essential - not always. If I owned the practice and didn't have to charge if I didn't want to, would I use it anyway? Probably.

I've a couple of thoughts to offer for consideration.

1. Contextualised care - as a profession, we've always done this to a degree. We were doing this 27 years ago when I qualified and there was no buzzword for it - if people couldn't afford the treatment you wished to prescribe, you went with 'Plan B' or 'Plan C' until you reached a compromise that helped the animal as best you could. We lost our way when undergraduates started being told that they'd be disciplined for not following 'gold standards' (whatever the hell that meant) and vets then became paralysed by fear on graduating. This seems to have abated somewhat.

2. The sentiment of 'I've always done it X way for 20 years and it's been good enough' - this is not a great argument for not advancing things on. I get it in socioeconomically disadvantaged regions, some modicum of common sense has to come in to what tests and procedures are used and what yield will result from them. However, at some point, in every veterinary discipline, we should try to move things along. Monitoring blood pressure wasn't done 25 years ago, gas anaesthetics weren't always used for routine surgeries 30 years ago. Very little went wrong, but it doesn't mean that the quality of what was being done shouldn't have been improved. It was and we practice better anaesthesia. The trouble with advancement is the law of diminishing returns - there are fewer massive leaps forward nowadays than there were years ago. And the costs of achieving smaller gains grow ever higher, with evidence for most improvements being very slow to catch up with them. At what point is an improvement an 'essential' improvement? For individuals, it may be very important, but on a population scale, minimal enough!

I think dental radiography fits in to both of these considerations - there is a cost to it and there are situations where it is very useful to have. And given the way veterinary dentistry has progressed, it is hard to argue against its routine use. Making it mandatory though, on a population scale, is more likely to lead to harm than not, even though the intention is to raise standards. Because the patients whose owners can afford it are likely to access it anyway and for those that don't or can't, their pet is then deprived of treatment.

Kind regards

James

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Martin Hamilton — Mon, 18 May 2026 12:32:53 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248868#248868"]You've been remarkably lucky then. It happens all the time in cats.[/quote]

Can't agree more Evelyn - I see second opinions for these almost weekly. Inappropriately crown amoutated teeth or retained roots resulting in oral pain.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248868#248868"]

Michael Woodhouse said:
My human dentist (retired) neighbour says they are not that interested in root tips in people, which id a stark contrast.

One can only conclude that pathology is different in humans, or that the reasons for broken root tips being retained are different in humans, or both.

[/quote]

The primary indication for extractions in people are endodontically healthy wisdom teeth i.e. the pulp is alive and well in the roots. In humans we have great evidence that leaving healthy roots behind tend to cause no problems. Now when it comes to our patients we aren't typically extracting "healthy" teeth - often theres advanced periodontal disease or fractures, whereby the pulp is likely infected. Leaving an infected tooth root intentionally in human dentistry is a huge no go as well.

Without your dental radiographs, you cannot ascertain whether a tooth has endodontic disease or not, unless you can visualise pulp exposure. Heck, the only data we have on this shows that ~20% of maxillary PM4s with a "chip" fracture (uncomplicated, or enamel-dentine) have radiographic evidence of endodontic disease (lucency, indicating bone destruction secondary to infection) without abnormal clinical findings.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248868#248868"]I just don't get this idea of "radiography would make it too expensive". 70 quid extra assuming you charge separately for the radiography at all? It's just part of the job.[/quote]

On the same page here Evelyn - you can buy second hand human grade generators and sensors now for <£1000 all in, use open source software etc. Biggest factor would be having the space for it.

As I said earlier, I bet 99% of the time even vets such as Michael are radiographing fractured limbs in cats and dogs to aid in treatment planning, despite him playing devils advocate.

[quote userid="9440" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248857#248857"]I suppose it depends on whether we expect dogs and cats to have perfect mouths or not [/quote]

Again, as Evelyn said, out goal is pain-free, functional (i.e. dog can close its mouth fully), and free from infection. To me that is "perfect" - to others "perfect" may mean extremes such as implants (I have had more clients request this than I can count....)!

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 13 May 2026 19:45:54 GMT

[quote userid="3169" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248852#248852"]never had an animal present clinically with an issue with a retained root tip[/quote]

You've been remarkably lucky then. It happens all the time in cats.

[quote userid="3169" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248852#248852"] My human dentist (retired) neighbour says they are not that interested in root tips in people, which id a stark contrast. [/quote]

One can only conclude that pathology is different in humans, or that the reasons for broken root tips being retained are different in humans, or both.

Veterinary dentistry has progressed quite a lot now beyond blindly aping the dental profession.

[quote userid="3169" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248852#248852"] It's not mandatory to radiograph a broken leg, [/quote]

But you'd be a chuffin' idiot not to.

I just don't get this idea of "radiography would make it too expensive". 70 quid extra assuming you charge separately for the radiography at all? It's just part of the job.

Having said which, I quite agree that trying to make radiography compulsory would just be silly. Regarding it as mandatory, clinically, for many cases and situations, now that's a different matter.

'Fraid not. For plenty of cases involving treatment to achieve health and comfort, not perfection, radiography is pretty important or essential.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Judith Joyce — Mon, 11 May 2026 17:50:22 GMT

[quote userid="8991" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory"]I believe there are some moves to make this a RCVS requirement. [/quote]

Is that requirement in that it would be prima facie evidence of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect or serious professional negligence to perform dentistry in the absence of dental radiography equipment, core standard requirement of PSS or something in the middle?

What other precise bits of kit are mandatory outside the practice standards scheme requirements? Or are we talking of some time in the future when it has been said that PSS at core standard will be compulsory?

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

janine redman — Mon, 11 May 2026 10:33:27 GMT

Having not had access to dental radiography during the first 23 years then having had access to radiography for ten years and now having set up as an independent practice where space rather than cost is more of an issue I am ambivalent about the benefit . A neighbouring practice does rely on two stage dental with full radiography for patients and some dogs and cats are under anaesthesia for 2-3 hours at a time with all the risks a prolonged anaesthetic could cause .
Both in cats and in dogs I am sure in the past I have left root fragments in situ but there are also numerous older dogs and cats where there have been crown fracture and presumably roots and root fragments under the gum with no clinical adverse effects . I have never been presented in 36 years with a patient ,( except feline stomatitis / gingivitis patients), where the concerns or pathology has been related to a root fragment or complications post dental .

It is challenging enough to get owners of dogs with clinical dental disease to afford dental treatment and if there are obvious rotten teeth I would prefer to remove these than have the client decline treatment. Persuading clients that there dog with foil halitosis and obvious rotten teeth takes skill, persuasion and diplomacy without additional cost concerns .

many clients have tried to join my practice because they have been quoted 1200 plus for a dental . If they have could rotten teeth surely it is better to remove those that are definitely causing pain and distress rather than specifically chasing a problem which may not exist.

Yes I am a Dino vet but my priority is the patients and like many I cannot honestly say that dental radiography has had a major change to my patients quality of life . Yes it is nice , but not essential in most cases .

I suppose it depends on whether we expect dogs and cats to have perfect mouths or not

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Michael Woodhouse — Sun, 10 May 2026 02:39:18 GMT

[quote userid="17895" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248824#248824"]- knowing the location of retained root tips , which ideally should all be removed , there is a paper published which says many of these go on to become infected if left [/quote]

Statements like this interest me, in that I've been doing "dentals" for 20 years and never had an animal present clinically with an issue with a retained root tip, and I'm sure there has been a few. My human dentist (retired) neighbour says they are not that interested in root tips in people, which id a stark contrast.

[quote userid="30821" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248658#248658"]Having said all that, dental XRays are now routine in dental exams for us hoomans. However, many of us can't get dental appointments at all. We live in an imperfect world. [/quote]

Yes, but I hope we come at this from generally opposite ends of the spectrum? I go to the dentist every 6 months or so for a check-up, and they sometimes pick up early and minor problems. The vast majority of teeth we touch in animals are horrible, and it's not a case of searching out some minor pathology - its a case of get the worse out the mouth and reduce the rot and improve the animal's QOL. I remember removing a complete set of greyhound teeth using just my fingers, they were that bad.

So, I think my view would be that 95% of vet oral pathology is so grossly visible (I'm not going to GA and radiograph the apparently good teeth, however often) in a healthy mouth. There's an awful lot of fairly horrendous dental disease we could deal with, and the biggest barrier is already cost. Anything that makes this more expensive (or slow), I feel is an overall bad thing. I have a machine that I've not fitted for these reasons.

I can see there is a place if you love your dentistry. I can see there is maybe a place as pet ownership declines and the only ones left are the wealthy fussy owners. It's not for me, and making it mandatory would have a negative effect on animal welfare. It's not mandatory to radiograph a broken leg, never mind a tooth. Gods sake, lets remember they are 'only' animals at the end of the day.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Clive Ansell — Tue, 05 May 2026 19:08:34 GMT

[quote userid="17895" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248433#248433"]Yes the RCVS should intervene and make radiography mandatory[/quote]

I think it would be utterly impractical, unworkable and unenforceable down on planet real world.

What would happen where a practice doesn't have the equipment, the necessary skill sets, the extra time, and clients cannot afford it or will not agree to it?

Are we really going to say we will not do essential dental work for your dog if you don't agree to radiography?

Best clinical practice yes, mandatory no.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Kate Pitcher — Tue, 05 May 2026 17:54:04 GMT

In no particular order:

-identifying painful teeth that would not have been picked up otherwise eg periapical root pathology

- being able to assess the degree of attachment loss and so work out how much bone does or doesn’t need to be removed to get the tooth out in the least traumatic way and minimise root fractures

- knowing in advance if any odd anatomy of a root that will make it harder to extract - means less roots broken , eg 3 roots present when there would ordinarily be 2

- knowing when a crown amputation is or isn’t acceptable in a cat, avoids trauma and ‘digging’ for a root which may not be there

- knowing the location of retained root tips , which ideally should all be removed , there is a paper published which says many of these go on to become infected if left

- checking post extraction that the entire root has been removed - not leaving root fragments behind that you were unaware of and which could go onto cause problems .

- identifying tooth resorption in crowns which has not currently extended into the oral cavity , but will do soon and do become painful

I could go on but my cooking needs my attention now and I’m hungry !!

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

ell — Tue, 05 May 2026 13:21:21 GMT

[quote userid="17895" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248433#248433"]I’m old enough (58!) to have done dentistry before X-rays were available and after X-rays were available . I would never do any dentistry ever again without X-rays . Patient welfare immeasurably improved , for any sceptics out there get yourself on some decent dental Cpd . Yes the RCVS should intervene and make radiography mandatory, should have been done some time ago in my view. [/quote]

Kate Pitcher Can you tell us what specifically improved re patient welfare, thanks

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Rhona Campbell — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 12:51:20 GMT

She could have done that, yes, but that wouldn't have assuaged her 'gold standard' desires for these animals (she would have been 'party' to them having dental work without rads). When she arrived she asked where to send hospitalised animals for their OOH overnight care. I said there were 2 choices: 1. she could leave them at the practice and 2. she could take them home with her. She was just not used to working remote and rural and serving all socio-economic groups!

Now, I have to balance this by saying that I learnt a lot of useful things from her too. She is a very caring smallie-only vet and a lovely girl! I don't doubt that she was wanting to offer the clients the best possible care, it's just that in these 3 dental cases, the immediate outcome for aiming for 'gold' was worse, rather than better.

I use 'gold standard' in inverted commas because I see it as a very unhelpful term.

Thank the Lord that at last the term 'contextualised care' has come in to more regular parlance as the more pragmatic standard and aim of every vet (even the specialists, hopefully??). Many of us have been practicing it for years!

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Clive Ansell — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 12:30:26 GMT

[quote userid="30821" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248658#248658"]I had a locum vet who refused to do dentals at my practice because I don't have dental XRay. I don't have it because of cost (it would take ages to pay it off in a single-handed remote and rural mixed practice). She referred 3 casese to the nearest practice which has dental XRay (3 hours away) and when I checked up on the outcome all 3 had cancelled on financial grounds and the animals had had no dental treatment done at all, leaving them in pain. [/quote]

Assuming it was a fairly short term locum, why could she not get them booked in when you returned?

I had the opposite happen to me as a locum. A practice owner with a keen interest in dentistry insisted on all dental cases having radiography, which I don't usually do so not 100% up to speed with it. She was happy for all caes to be booked for her on her return from a 2 weeks break.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Rhona Campbell — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 12:24:51 GMT

Well said

I'm in the 'optional (by referral) but not mandatory' camp.

I don't have it because of cost (it would take ages to pay it off in a single-handed remote and rural mixed practice). My clients wouldn't pay for it and so it would be a big white elephant.

I had a locum vet who refused to do dentals at my practice because I don't have dental XRay. She referred 3 cases to the nearest practice which has dental XRay (3 hours away) and when I found out and checked up on the outcome, all 3 had cancelled on financial grounds and the animals had had no dental treatment done at all, leaving them in pain. One had died and I did dentals for the 2 others here in the practice without dental rads.

It's contextualised care we need. I can refer someone for dental rads if they want that (after discussing the pros (seeing+knowing more about what might be going on) versus the cons (largely cost). Making dental rads mandatory for all dental procedures (and is that including routine scale and polish procedures??) to satisfy some need to have a 'gold standard' would result in dental procedures only being available for the few who could afford it. Those who couldn't would have to do without. This would be a very backward step and a totally forseeable and unforgiveable consequence of making dental XRays mandatory for all dental procedures.. We need to take the broad view and not the tunnel view re animal welfare.

Interestingly I went on some dental CPD at BSAVA in Glasgow 2 years ago and vet dental specialist Ingrid Turbo asked the room how many had dental XRay. Less than a third of those present had it in their practices...

Having said all that, dental XRays are now routine in dental exams for us hoomans. However, many of us can't get dental appointments at all. We live in an imperfect world.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

David Mills — Fri, 06 Mar 2026 02:21:49 GMT

[quote userid="16672" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248483#248483"]To play devil's advocate a little here - how many of you would pin or ex-fix a leg without radiography? [/quote]

Young animals - do you need a radiograph to diagnose a fractured limb? Say a 4 month old kitten - probably woulnd't do a femoral repair anyway. [my point is that we can always find outliers to divert from the main debate]

[quote userid="16672" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248483#248483"]and leaving those behind leaves the patient with apical periodontitis [/quote]

This is a surrogate outcome no? To my knowledge there is no validatd system of assessing dental pain objectively in veterinary patients. Why is it different in humans?

[quote userid="16672" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248483#248483"]needs treatment, [/quote]

How do we know?

[quote userid="16672" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248483#248483"]I see some absolute disasters referred to me, typically the worst ones are where dental rads weren't taken (they are recommended here but not mandatory). Cats with inflammatory resorption where vets have tried to crown amp, leaving infected roots behind, draining tracts etc. Fractured mandibles that were put down to "normal movement of the jaw". Facial swellings that persist following "extraction" as fractured roots with infected pulp were left behind. Cats and dogs treated for "tooth root abscesses" and extraction that were, in fact, neoplasia that was pretty apparent radiographically. [/quote]

I'm sure these are all true but it is not that they happen but how commonly they do and how decision-making may have been changed by mandatory radiography?

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Martin Hamilton — Fri, 06 Mar 2026 01:49:37 GMT

[quote userid="8991" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248486#248486"]The question begs, then, whether vets who are pro-mandatory dental rads would do them for free to satisfy this ethical issue?[/quote]

100% I would. You can buy a used CR processor and second dental radiograph generator for ~£1000. And I'm not even in the mandatory crowd.

[quote userid="8991" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248486#248486"]We do not, at present, have a validated method of even assessing oral pain in animals (except those with horrendous mouths) so how can we with any confidence say that x or y on radiography is significant? [Cats are slightly different in terms of FORLs/ankylosed roots][/quote]

I would lean towards the fact that the anatomy is near identical to humans, so there's no reason to suspect they perceive oral pain any differently than us. Just my interpretation of the comparative side of dentistry. They've used dogs as research models for human dentistry since the 60s.

Anyway, just to reiterate, I'm still siding with "recommended but not mandatory"

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

David Mills — Fri, 06 Mar 2026 01:24:17 GMT

Some interesting replies here.

Having thought about this since the weekend my two penneth is as follows.

I think the general argument about mandatory radiography perfectly illustrates how we may be losing sight of what is 'good enough'. Most of the replies on here seem to have a broad utilitarian basis - achieving the greatest good for the greatest number. ‘Greatest’ is relative and doesn’t mean perfect. Achieving acceptable welfare (or at the very least minimising pain and/or suffering) for as many animals as possible carries moral weight and I suspect most people agree (the opposite is excellent welfare for the few) this is generally how we work. I don’t think any vet thinks we should be doing fewer dental procedures. As Malcolm says, to really interrogate this we need intention to treat analysis.

Fine. Now, radiography. The issue I have is that whilst it can and often is useful is it useful enough to make it mandatory. No. Yes it can reveal pathology that is not visible to the naked eye but how significant is that pathology. The article I linked at the start showed a relatively high percentage of pathology detected by radiography subgingivally. However, the significance of this is unknown (and even the studies in that paper of 200 dogs or whatever is underpowered) – because radiographic results are by their nature surrogate outcomes. We do not, at present, have a validated method of even assessing oral pain in animals (except those with horrendous mouths) so how can we with any confidence say that x or y on radiography is significant? [Cats are slightly different in terms of FORLs/ankylosed roots]

Cost has creeped in here too which is important. From a justice ethic perspective if we are saying that x-rays are mandatory then we are saying without spending £x then we will not treat your animal’s dental disease. That is a barrier which lacks, to my mind, strong enough clinical justification. The question begs, then, whether vets who are pro-mandatory dental rads would do them for free to satisfy this ethical issue?

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Michael Woodhouse — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 22:26:03 GMT

I have done. We diagnose and where possible fix virtually all the fractures in farm animals without radiography.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Martin Hamilton — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 21:59:35 GMT

To play devil's advocate a little here - how many of you would pin or ex-fix a leg without radiography?

I see some absolute disasters referred to me, typically the worst ones are where dental rads weren't taken (they are recommended here but not mandatory). Cats with inflammatory resorption where vets have tried to crown amp, leaving infected roots behind, draining tracts etc. Fractured mandibles that were put down to "normal movement of the jaw". Facial swellings that persist following "extraction" as fractured roots with infected pulp were left behind. Cats and dogs treated for "tooth root abscesses" and extraction that were, in fact, neoplasia that was pretty apparent radiographically.

You can buy second hand X-ray kit for a couple of grand. The cost is only a barrier of entry if you look for the flashy new iM3 equipment (which is nice, but not a necessity). Don't bill for it and you'll find enough pathology that you would have missed otherwise that needs treatment, and the equipment will pay for itself.

To circle back to the roots being left behind in humans - pretty standard to leave them behind in humans if the pulp was alive and well prior to the extraction - often the pulp retains vitality and poses no issue. The problem with our patients is that many teeth are fractured with necrotic pulp, and leaving those behind leaves the patient with apical periodontitis (toothache in a human). I do think we over-emphasise the need of extracting every shard of tooth root though, but it's nuanced.

Alas, I will side with the "recommended yes, mandatory no". Though there should be informed consent with owners warned that things may be missed.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Kate Richardson — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 15:22:41 GMT

Also why is that ouch? I bet you charge considerably more for your surgical procedures. I say ouch when I hear of the prices of some of the referral surgeries.....

Admission appointment, 1 nurse, 1 vet, preparing the equipment, medications, hospitalising the animal, inducing GA, monitoring it through out then in recovery then discharging to the owner showing them the xrays, then cleaning and sterilising everything for the next procedure? I've probably missed something out, but you get my drift

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Kate Richardson — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 15:12:17 GMT

GA/full mouth assessment (probing and charting), scale and polish and full mouth xrays. Discounted if members of pet health club

No set time frame, repeated if/when clinically needed. Appropriate preventative care advised to reduce the need and to reduce chance of extractions being needed in the future.

We run an option on our pet health club scheme where cats can have this treatment every 2 years (I reiterate if needed) instead of having flea and tick treatment.

Maybe cat owners are more discerning than dog owners

We encourage pet insurance that includes dental treatment cover as well and are finding it is covered a lot more than it was many years ago as long as advice is followed

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Mark Holmes — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 14:59:33 GMT

[quote userid="8663" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248474#248474"]To be honest, I hadn't heard about this being defined in numbers before. If that's reliable, I've learnt something today (as usual[/quote]

It’s not necessarily the defined minimum but based on previous case law the minimum number (so far) that has satisfied the reasonable body argument. I believe it comes from the medical world. In which case 11 is a very small proportion of practitioners.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Alasdair Hotston Moore — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 14:23:09 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248467#248467"]What, you mean the prosecution has to field 11 people to define what is reasonable? What happens if the defence fields 12 for the counter argument? (serious question)[/quote]

Reasonable body is a benchmark for judging negligence. If a reasonable body would agree you did a reasonable thing, you're not negligent. That would therefore be the defence having to identify 11 people to support your approach. Its not based on a majority so it doesn't matter how many for the prosecution say you're an idiot.

To be honest, I hadn't heard about this being defined in numbers before. If that's reliable, I've learnt something today (as usual)

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Alasdair Hotston Moore — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 14:17:11 GMT

[quote userid="6386" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248443#248443"]dental assessments which is around the £400 mark [/quote]

So £400 per pet, annually or bi annually? This is why people are concerned about vets fees. That's for assessment (inc x-ray), and excluding any procedures (or perhaps including scaling I assume). Ouch

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Alasdair Hotston Moore — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 14:14:24 GMT

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248439#248439"]Just last week we had a client coming in from a neighbouring practice that would not do a dental without xrays and cost was prohibitive. They had the option to either euthanise the pet or leave the pet in pain and discomfort[/quote]

Absolutely. That's the danger here: in a time when our fees are already expensive, mandatory x-rays for dentistry simply prices people out of the service and compromises welfare.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Clive Ansell — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 13:51:41 GMT

[quote userid="6386" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248469#248469"]

my record for a cat full mouth is 7 minutes...haven't challenged myself recently. Generally no more than 10 minutes, easily saved time when you see the roots are resorbing....

But you do you need to doing them regularly to be quick. So training a nurse to do them may be key in some practices where vets aren't doing dentals regularly

[/quote]

I've recently finished a locum where dental radiography is included for all dental cases, and is carried out by RVN's who say it adds about 15 minutes maximum to the procedure overall.

Only problem with that, certainly in many corporate practices in light of their recent efficiency streaming redundancies, is there are just not enough boots on the ground for it to work quickly.

[quote userid="7232" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248463#248463"]and many practices really are so short of room that the issue is space [/quote]

I think if the will is genuinely there to do it, the space would be found?

[quote userid="7232" url="~/f/clinical-questions/31317/should-dental-radiography-be-mandatory/248463#248463"]I’m constantly surprised by the inadequacy of many practice buildings[/quote]

True, but not surprised.

Most/many practices are re-purposed buildings of decades duration that were intended for other or residential use, they are not purpose designed and built for the task.

RE: Should dental radiography be mandatory?

Kate Richardson — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 12:31:21 GMT

Clive Ansell my record for a cat full mouth is 7 minutes...haven't challenged myself recently. Generally no more than 10 minutes, easily saved time when you see the roots are resorbing....

But you do you need to doing them regularly to be quick. So training a nurse to do them may be key in some practices where vets aren't doing dentals regularly