Historically, the UK has seen a steady increase in the elaboration of facing point protection over time. The need for this elaboration is not supported by the published railway accident reports, but presumably is driven by unreported incidents of failures of the apparatus. It would also be driven by the very strong normalisation imposed by the Board of Trade requirements and by railway industry consensus.
In my view, the story really starts in the 1870s when the UK railway industry was caught in a cleft stick. On one hand traffic was booming and line capacity was becoming a real issue. This was made worse by the rapidly increasing speed of passenger trains, which not only increased the need to overtake slow goods trains, but made it more likely for trains to derail if the points weren't possibly closed, and made the consequences of derailment more serious. The consequence was that there was a desperate need to increase capacity, balanced by a strong desire to avoid facing points. The result was a rapid evolution in facing point technology which set the norms for the UK rail industry which can still seen today. Other countries did not face this challenge that early, and the railway industry consensus that developed there was different.
First, I definitely have in mind that detectors holding points predate facing point locks and lockbars (and, indeed, interlocking). I can't find examples at the moment, but I've certainly read early accident reports that discuss 'wire locks'. These were what we'd now call detectors placed in wire runs to signals to ensure that hand worked points were in the correctly set for the main line and remained so when the signal was cleared.
Rapier, in his 1874 paper, is clear that when interlocking was introduced, the interlocking and rodding was at first relied upon to hold the points. The first problem encountered was the 'frequent' reversal of points under trains. The locking bar was invented in 1867 by Livesey and Edwards to address this problem. At first it was coupled to the point lever, but in 1869 Saxby and Farmer began working the lockbar by a separate lever. Note that the facing point lock (i.e. bolting the points) had not been adopted at this time. By 1874 the FPL had been added to ensure that the point blades were fully home to one side or another and to "provide against the most dangerous class of accident."
The basic UK facing point layout had evolved by this time, but variations most certainly existed and were illustrated by Rapier. The then president of the ICE, Harrison, had introduced the most interesting on the NER. This secured the point blades individually using wedges, rather than jointly by means of a bolt in the stretcher. This system, I believe, lasted until the expiry of the NER at grouping (and, of course, examples in use survived much later).
By 1874, the problem that the facing point lock didn't prove the position of the points was recognised. Rapier mentions a couple of proposals to solve the problem. He does not, however, talk about detectors in the wire run. For this reason I believe that detectors were not in use at this date, or at least, were not commonly known.
By 1892 the Board of Trade requirements officially discouraged the use of facing points ('Facing points should be avoided as far as possible'). When they were provided they 'should' be fitted with facing point locks and lockbars. A plain English reading would suggest that this means that facing point locks and lockbars were not mandatory at this time, but this would be surprising. Detectors still weren't mentioned. When the text was revised in 1902, facing point locks, and lockbars were mandatory, as was a means of detecting any failure of the rodded connections (one method of which is a detector).
When Raynar Wilson published his 'Mechanical Railway Signalling' in about 1910 wire detectors were standard practice. Many different types are illustrated in the book.
Even by this time, 'best' practice was still evolving. Ideas that are described in Raynar Wilson, but not yet common practice, were the use of split stretcher bars to guard against the point blades becoming detached from the stretcher and from the operating lever, detection of the FPL plunger, and operation of the plunger through the lockbar. Good practice, but not universal practice at the time, was detection of both point blades.