Almost two years after raising the issue of “below-standard” breast prostheses for cancer patients, women who have had a mastectomy are still being offered a “hollow and rubbery” replacement by the government.

Moreover, they feel the monopolistic situation of the prosthesis provider should be rectified and that they should be able to use their government voucher at any retail outlet of their choice.

Cancer lobby groups have been complaining that the prostheses on offer are poor in quality, comfort, purpose and function. They believe superior, solid, silicone prostheses could be available for practically the same price as the light product, which rides up if they lift their arm, remains dented if touched and has all the “wrong characteristics” that do nothing to help a woman in such a traumatic situation.

However, the ball seems to be rolling and the person tasked by the Health Minister to look into the situation last August has spoken to the interested parties, insisting the “matter is being seriously handled”.

The policy coordinator at the Health Ministry, Maria Cassar, said the whole process from mastectomy to prosthesis, including the tender, was being assessed and she was optimistic the many complaints would be addressed.

Back in 2009, the Action for Breast Cancer Foundation had presented a report that listed the deficiencies of the fake breasts to the Health Ministry, which had said it was in the process of issuing a tender to switch to silicone prostheses with a two-year guarantee, entitling women to another prosthetic breast after two years. But the situation remained unchanged and while the cancer lobby group has acknowledged meetings have been held with the policy coordinator, it said it had not yet received any feedback.

Ms Cassar confirmed she was asked to explore the concerns properly and document them, adding the first step was to validate the complaints, which had now been forwarded to the ministry. She said not every concern could be given the same weight, such as the request to change the prostheses every three months and the need for a variety to cater for various activities.

But the foundation also has issues with the way the government prosthesis is provided, pointing out women who had just had their breast tissue surgically removed and wanted to resume normality had to experience the inconvenience of finding the house that supplied them in the side streets of Mosta and undergo the delicate ordeal of getting a replacement in an unwelcoming environment that did not offer privacy.

Foundation co-founder Esther Sant, who had had breast cancer herself, said she had been to the private house that provided the government prosthesis twice along the years and the décor, with its “dirty plastic flower arrangements”, has never changed.

“The room where women try on their ‘new’ breasts is dimly lit, even though they need the right light to look in the mirror,” she said.

Ms Sant said women who requested breast prosthesis after a mastectomy received a letter from the government after waiting a whole eight weeks. It instructed them to call the provider but appointments were only accepted after 5 p.m.

“At your appointment, you are shown the prosthesis provided by the government for your voucher of €46 but you are immediately told that if you add about €20 more you could get one that is up to standard,” she said. “Most women add the extra money but why should they not have access to the right product straightaway?”

Ms Sant said the foundation had researched breast prostheses and found that the “proper” type costs €70 and was probably cheaper today, especially if the government did its homework and bought in bulk.

While not wishing to jeopardise anyone’s business, she pointed out the tender had always gone to the same person. “No one wants to take it away from her but we just want a good product,” she said, recommending that audits should be carried out annually to ensure the correct procedure was being followed, the right quality product being offered, and it was up to EU standards.

Apart from psychological implications, an inappropriate and unrealistic prosthesis also has physical repercussions, according to users. If the breasts were not the right weight on both sides, they could develop problems in their torso, back and shoulders.

The inferior prosthesis is an “insult”, failing to mimic natural breasts, according to a woman who has undergone two mastectomies.

Betty Lee said that when she received the prosthesis in 2005 she accidently dropped it and her cat found it to be a “great toy” – the only role it still fulfils to date.

“It was so light (at 165g it is 200g less than the silicone version) that when I put my hand up it remained up too, so I was always conscious that I still looked abnormal. After a mastectomy, it is important to allow a woman her dignity.”