Transvaginal mesh in Australia: An analysis of news media reporting from 1996 to 2021.

Senate Inquiry class action epistemic injustice innovative surgery media analysis transvaginal mesh

Journal

Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy
ISSN: 1369-7625
Titre abrégé: Health Expect
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9815926

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 2023
Historique:
revised: 05 02 2023
received: 13 10 2022
accepted: 07 02 2023
medline: 4 5 2023
pubmed: 23 2 2023
entrez: 22 2 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Transvaginal mesh (mesh) surgeries have been used to treat stress urinary incontinence (incontinence) and/or pelvic organ prolapse (prolapse). In Australia, as in many other countries, the harms caused by mesh eventually prompted individual and collective attempts to achieve redress. The rise of mesh surgery as a procedure, the experience of mesh-affected women and the formal inquiries and legal actions that followed all occurred in social, cultural and discursive contexts. One strategy to understand these contexts is to track how the mesh and key actors in the mesh stories have been portrayed in mass media sources. We conducted a media analysis of the most highly read Australian newspapers and online news media platforms, focusing on how mesh and the interaction of stakeholders in mesh stories were presented to the Australian public. We searched systematically in the top 10 most-read print and online media outlets in Australia. We included all articles that mentioned mesh, from the date of first use of mesh in Australia to the date of our final search (1996-2021). After early scant media reporting focusing on the benefits of mesh procedures, major Australian medicolegal processes created a hook to shift reporting about mesh. The news media then played a significant role in redressing women's experienced epistemic injustice, including by amplifying previously ignored evidence of harm. This created an opportunity for previously unreported suffering to be revealed to powerful actors, in settings beyond the immediate control and epistemic authority of healthcare stakeholders, validating women's testimony and creating new hermeneutic resources for understanding mesh. Over time, media reports show healthcare stakeholders responding sympathetically to these new understandings in public discourse, contrasting with their statements in earlier media coverage. We argue that mass media reporting, in synergy with medicolegal actions and the Australian Senate Inquiry, appears to have provided women with greater epistemic justice, giving their testimony privileged epistemic status such that it was considered by powerful actors. Although medical reporting is not recognised in the hierarchy of evidence embedded in the medical knowledge system, in this case, media reporting appears to have contributed to shaping medical knowledge in significant ways. We used publicly available data, print and online media outlets, for our analysis. Therefore, this manuscript does not contain the direct contribution of patients, service users, caregivers, people with lived experience or members of the public.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36811617
doi: 10.1111/hex.13734
pmc: PMC10154800
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1189-1201

Informations de copyright

© 2023 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

Urology. 2021 Apr;150:194-200
pubmed: 32439554
N Engl J Med. 2000 Jun 1;342(22):1645-50
pubmed: 10833211
BMJ. 2014 Jun 13;348:g3725
pubmed: 24927763
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2011;14(4):286-303
pubmed: 21932944
Health Expect. 2019 Jun;22(3):485-495
pubmed: 30729625
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2005 Oct;30(5):923-54
pubmed: 16477792
Med Health Care Philos. 2014 Nov;17(4):529-40
pubmed: 24740808
BMJ Open. 2017 Dec 6;7(12):e017125
pubmed: 29212782
J Med Ethics. 2004 Apr;30(2):160-5
pubmed: 15082810
BMJ. 2014 Dec 09;349:g7465
pubmed: 25498123
Int J Qual Health Care. 2012 Feb;24(1):1-8
pubmed: 22117025
Intern Med J. 2018 Aug;48(8):924-930
pubmed: 29663620
BMJ. 2017 Dec 7;359:j5515
pubmed: 29217786
World J Surg. 1999 Aug;23(8):789-93
pubmed: 10415204
Bioethics. 2014 Mar;28(3):119-26
pubmed: 22681677
Health Expect. 2023 Jun;26(3):1189-1201
pubmed: 36811617
J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2022 Mar-Apr;27(2):191-195
pubmed: 35937115
Health Expect. 2019 Jun;22(3):518-527
pubmed: 30891890
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Sep;260:113151
pubmed: 32738706
Patient. 2022 Mar;15(2):157-169
pubmed: 34609727
BMC Med Genet. 2015 May 09;16:32
pubmed: 25956914
Climacteric. 2019 Jun;22(3):277-282
pubmed: 30829077

Auteurs

Mina Motamedi (M)

Australian Centre for Health Engagement Evidence and Values (ACHEEV), School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.

Stacy M Carter (SM)

Australian Centre for Health Engagement Evidence and Values (ACHEEV), School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.

Chris Degeling (C)

Australian Centre for Health Engagement Evidence and Values (ACHEEV), School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH