���˿���

To be fair, we are learning from the women who have experienced the situation that a lot of services could be improved. That is why I know that a lot of listening has been done. I appreciate that, at the start of this process, the women did not feel as though they were being listened to. So, to support them even more, listening has been absolutely key.

If anyone has experienced surgery, they will know that the best information that they can get is as much information as can be given, and a simple letter is sometimes not enough. That is why post-surgery phone calls to women have been introduced. That is incredibly important. I have suffered some surgery, and I know that you really do not take on board what people are saying during the first 24 hours after surgery. So, we need to find ways of keeping women more informed after their surgery.

It is also important to keep their families informed, because that is where the women’s main support will be once they have left the hospital environment. Improvements can be made, and I hope that that will happen. We have talked about the accountable officers in the health boards and how sending additional information to GPs should provide the level of support that women rightly expect.

That is a natural follow-on. Given that the service is improving its support for pre-referral and post-referral people, there has to be an indication on the patient’s records that that has happened, so that GPs and local health boards and their officials recognise that additional support may be required.

I have had meetings with groups that have concerns about treatment for other women’s conditions, and they have talked about that issue as well. I do not want to increase the pressures on the women’s health plan, but there is something to think about more holistically across health delivery for women in Scotland, to ensure that their aftercare is appropriate to their surgery and the support that they have had around it.

I know that Dr O’Kelly has talked about credentialling across the four nations. I am not clear how far those discussions have gone, but I know that the surgeons who operate in Scotland have been trained to very high standards.

I do not know whether Greig Chalmers has anything to add, but it is probably best if we come back to you with an indication of progress that has been made in credentialling across the four nations and with the numbers of those who have been trained.

I am sure that we can.

That question is along the same lines as that asked by your colleague Dr Gulhane. I have offered to send the committee the complex mesh surgical service pathway. I am aware of the evidence that you received on 2 May. I felt that Dr Mathers clarified in that meeting that an electronic referral from the health board to the service is required. As I said, we will send the complex mesh surgical service pathway to the committee so that you have sight of it.

Dr Gulhane, that is what I said yesterday. I did the same thing. We have taken that away and will find out why that is happening.

I was pleased to meet Professor Anna Glasier very early after she was appointed. Her skills and personality embed exactly what women would like to see in their health champion. As you indicated, we have prioritised the menopause and endometriosis. I will have further discussions with the women’s health team about how we can expand on those. It is important to say that, although Anna Glasier is the champion, we also have a group of officers who are working further on the plan. Greig Chalmers leads the group specifically on this.

We have a lot to do. In a meeting last week, I said that, until we can say “health” without having to put the word “women’s” before it, we have a long way to go. However, I am confident that, with Professor Glasier’s leadership and the wealth of groups of women who want to get involved in women’s health and to raise it to the headlines, that can only be welcomed.

I am afraid that I have no information on the incontinence plan. I apologise.

I have read some of the reports from women who really struggled to explain to, and be listened to by, their GPs in the years leading up to 2015—when the issue was given front-page billing in media reports—and I can only imagine how frustrating that must have been for the women.

The work that has been done in Scotland and the cross-party work that Parliament has done has really improved everyone’s knowledge of the impact of vaginal mesh on women. As I indicated earlier, the fact that we have set up that specialist service and that specialist services are being set up in NHS England, too, with options to go abroad, is really helpful.

In an earlier answer to a supplementary question from Stephanie Callaghan, I indicated the training that NHS England has created for GPs and the importance of the work that Dr O’Kelly is doing to ensure that Scottish GPs can access that training, which is absolutely key to getting it right. I also refer back to the individuals in each of the health boards who are there to provide support.

Can you cover the point about medical records, Greig?

From the reading that I have done and the way that I have seen the service change over the past couple of years, I think that it has absolutely moved to being that holistic service. Early on in this evidence session, I mentioned that the service must be based on the person—the patient—so I strongly believe that the way that we can provide the best support for the women in this situation is by understanding their needs.

In about a third of referrals, I think, patients end up not choosing to go for surgery but looking for holistic support such as physiotherapy or support for pain or wellbeing. The service has to be aware of the possibility that that number could increase. I hope that the service will evolve to support women in the way that they feel is most appropriate to their circumstances.

I see that Greig Chalmers is nodding—he may want to add something.

We have to strike a balance. On 2 May, the committee was given clear evidence about the importance of having one route that everybody understands and that would avoid any confusion or cluttering of the landscape.

What I take away from your questions is that we need to ensure that GPs are absolutely clear about the pathway, perhaps by writing directly to the health boards and their officers who have responsibility for the matter. However, adding another pathway might cause confusion, and it might not be the best way of supporting women who are in desperate need of this support.