House of Commons Debate – Cumberlege review: Pelvic mesh (5 December 2024)

Summary

This is a brief summary of a Westminster Hall debate in the House of Commons on the 5 December 2024 concerning pelvic mesh and the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review (also known as the Cumberlege Review).

Content

What is a Westminster Hall debate?

Westminster Hall debates give Members of Parliament (MPs) an opportunity to raise local or national issues and receive a response from a government minister. Any MP can take part in a Westminster Hall debate.

Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety (IMMDS) Review

The IMMDS Review examined the response of the healthcare system in England to the harmful side effects of three medical interventions: hormone pregnancy tests, sodium valproate and pelvic mesh implants.

Its final report, First Do No Harm, published in July 2020, found that these interventions have resulted in a truly shocking degree of avoidable harm to patients over a period of decades. The Review describing the healthcare system’s response to this as “disjointed, siloed, unresponsive and defensive”. The Review made nine over-arching safety recommendations following on from its findings.

House of Commons debate

In the discussion MPs highlighted individual cases from their constituents relating to pelvic mesh, and also raised broader issues including:

• Concerns relating to specialist mesh centres, intended to offer comprehensive treatment, care and advice, including removal surgery, to patients harmed by pelvic mesh implants.
• Points around the above point included the small number of these facilities (9 in England), questions about the suitability of some professionals working in these (who in some case may be surgeons who inserted mesh implants), concerns about length waits when patients ask for second opinion, and lack readily available mental health support and counselling.
• Lack of progress in acting on recommendations set out in the Hughes Report, published by the Patient Safety Commissioner, considering options for redress.
• Questions about the suitability of the Yellow Card scheme, run by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to monitor the safety of healthcare products, and whether reporting to this should be mandatory.

In his comments in response at the end of the debate, Government Minister Andrew Gywnne MP (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health and Prevention), stated that:

• The 10-year health plan that the Government are consulting on will ensure a better health service for everyone, regardless of their condition or service area. A core part of the development of the 10-year plan, including its approach to women’s health, will be an extensive engagement exercise with the public, NHS staff and stakeholders.
• The IMMDS review made nine recommendations, and the then Government accepted seven. Of those seven, four have been delivered, including the appointment of Dr Henrietta Hughes as the first Patient Safety Commissioner in England, the establishment of nine specialist mesh centres across England and the establishment of a patient reference group. The Government are committed to delivering on the remaining three recommendations.
• The Government are still considering the recommendations of the Hughes Report and are committed to providing an update at the earliest opportunity.

You can watch the full debate here.

Related reading

• Redress, research and regulatory reform are still needed: An overview of patient safety issues related to surgical mesh (Patient Safety Learning, 1 May 2023)
• Reflections on The Hughes Report: Pelvic mesh, sodium valproate, hormone pregnancy tests and options for redress (Patient Safety Learning, 20 February 2024)