ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025
The invite study: incisional hernia prevention: prophylactic mesh from the patient's perspective.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prophylactic mesh at stoma reversal reduces incisional hernia without increasing early complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMesh-augmented abdominal wall closure (Mesh prophylaxis) reduces incisional hernia rates in high-risk patients. In spite of a large body of evidence supporting its efficacy and safety, use of mesh prophylaxis is low in the US and UK, possibly due to negative perceptions of surgical mesh
methodsFollowing ethical approval, a convergent mixed-methods study was conducted whereby patients who had undergone elective or emergency surgery (n=332) were approached to participate in a questionnaire assessing knowledge and opinions regarding mesh prophylaxis Semi-structured interviews were conducted in a subset of participants (n=12) and thematic analysis performed.
results120 questionnaires were returned with a response rate of 36.1%. The majority (61.8%) of participants had heard of surgical mesh, with half (51.7%) having a negative association, driven by the media. Half (50%) of participants had pre-existing concerns about mesh, however the majority (91%) felt mesh prophylaxis to be acceptable, findings which were echoed in the qualitative component. Analysis of interview data identified three themes: "Knowledge of mesh" and "Acceptability of mesh", which triangulated with findings in the survey data and "Shared decision-making", which explored how participants wanted to receive information about mesh. Factors affecting acceptability of mesh included the nature of information given to patients, and the way in which it was delivered.
conclusionsDespite negative pre-conceptions, mesh prophylaxis is broadly acceptable to patients. The results of this work will be used to develop patient resources to support mesh prophylaxis. Future mixed-methods studies identifying the surgeons' barriers to use of mesh are needed to allow targeted implementation of prophylactic mesh.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.