Search

Objective: To evaluate the health status and recovery of women after mid-urethral sling (MUS) revision in response to complications., Design: Cross-sectional study using a questionnaire sent to women from a registry., Setting: Twenty-two French surgical centres., Population: A total of 287 women from the VIGI-MESH registry responded, having undergone MUS revision for complications., Methods: Our sample of women were compared against a representative set of French women taken from the Eurostat database. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify clinical predictors for successful MUS revision. A qualitative analysis was carried out on free-text comments., Main Outcome Measures: Health status, defined by the Minimum European Health Module, and recovery, assessed by Patient Global Impression of Improvement., Results: The response rate was 76% (287/378), with 49% of the women (141/287, 95% CI 43%-55%) reporting good health status, which was 8 points lower than that expected from the comparator French set (57%, 95% CI 55%-58%). Overall, 53% (147/275, 95% CI 47%-59%) of the women reported feeling much better after MUS revision. Just over one-third (35%, 95/275, 95% CI 29%-40%) of respondents reported poor health with little or no improvement. Multivariate analysis showed that being operated on for pain at revision was associated with worse self-perceived health than being operated on for exposure (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14-0.95); women with pre-existing comorbidity reported a poorer health status following MUS revision (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13-0.38)., Conclusions: Our results suggest that half of the women recovered good health status after MUS revision, whereas a proportion appeared to be seriously affected by an MUS complication despite the revision., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Improving health governance is increasingly recognised as a key pillar for achieving universal health coverage (UHC). One good practice example of a participatory health governance platform is the National Health Assembly (NHA) in Thailand. This review of 9 years of the Thai NHA process attempted to understand how it works, given the paucity of such mechanisms worldwide. In addition, an in-depth look at its strengths and weaknesses allowed for reflection on whether the lessons learnt from this participatory governance model can be relevant for other settings. Overall, the power of stakeholder groups coming together has been impressively harnessed in the NHA process. The NHA has helped foster dialogue through understanding and respect for very differing takes on the same issue. The way in which different stakeholders discuss with each other in a real attempt at consensus thus represents a qualitatively improved policy dialogue. Nevertheless, the biggest challenge facing the NHA is ensuring a sustainable link to decision-making and the highest political circles. Modalities are needed to make NHA resolutions high priorities for the health sector. The NHA embodies many core features of a well-prepared deliberative process as defined in the literature (information provision, diverse views, opportunity to discuss freely) as well as key ingredients to enable the public to effectively participate (credibility, legitimacy and power). This offers important lessons for other countries for conducting similar processes. However, more research is necessary to understand how improvements in the deliberative process lead to concrete policy outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.