Pelvic mesh implants were inserted in over 127,000 women in the UK between 2008 and 2017. Following the IMMDS Review (2020) and the Hughes Report (2024), significant regulatory attention has focused on the scale of harm. However, the lived experiential dimensions of this harm — as expressed by affected women in digital and public spaces — remain underanalysed. This study aimed to characterise the dominant themes in patient-generated discourse on pelvic mesh across multiple platforms.

Reflexive thematic analysis [1] was applied to publicly available patient-generated content from: Sling the Mesh community outputs (2020–2026); patient testimonies submitted to the IMMDS Review and Patient Safety Learning Hub; news comment threads associated with BBC, ITV, and Sky News coverage; parliamentary debate transcripts (Hansard, 2024); peer-reviewed qualitative studies (PMC-indexed, 2023–2025); and the Hughes Report (2024). Thematic coding was conducted iteratively across all sources.

Seven primary themes were identified:

        1.      Chronic physical suffering and life disruption — including permanent pain, mobility loss, and employment impact
        2.      Medical gaslighting and epistemic injustice — with women consistently reporting symptom dismissal and near-     
                  abandonment of care [2]
        3.      Loss of sexual identity and intimate relationships
        4.      Institutional and regulatory failure — including inadequate post-market surveillance and delayed governmental response
        5.      Betrayed informed consent — women reporting insufficient pre-operative risk disclosure
        6.      The online patient community as therapeutic resource and advocacy infrastructure
        7.      Justice delayed — encompassing the ongoing absence of financial redress

An overarching meta-theme of structural medical misogyny was identified as underpinning all seven themes, manifest in the systematic minimisation of women’s pain and the attribution of symptoms to menopause, anxiety, or psychological instability. This pattern constitutes testimonial injustice, wherein patients’ contributions to knowledge are unjustly excluded or dismissed [3].

Patient discourse on pelvic mesh reveals a coherent, cross-platform narrative of harm extending beyond the physical into psychological, relational, and civic dimensions. The persistent gap between patient testimony and institutional response represents ongoing epistemic injustice requiring active redress. Healthcare providers, regulators, and policymakers require targeted training in recognising this pattern. Gynaecological and ultrasound scanning services have a particular role in early identification of mesh complications and in providing clinical environments in which women’s reported symptoms are taken seriously from first contact. This analysis has direct implications for specialist mesh centre design, informed consent protocols, and implementation of outstanding Cumberlege Review recommendations.

Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications; 2022.
Thornton C, et al. When things go wrong: experiences of vaginal mesh complications. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(7):1575–1581. doi:10.1007/s00192-022-05422-z
Motamedi M, Carter SM, Degeling C. Transvaginal mesh in Australia: an analysis of news media reporting from 1996 to 2021. Health Expect. 2023;26:1189–1201. doi:10.1111/hex.13734

Continence 19S (2026) 102722
DOI: 10.1016/j.cont.2026.102722