↓ Skip to main content

‘You don’t throw these things out:’ an exploration of medicines retention and disposal practices in Australian homes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
‘You don’t throw these things out:’ an exploration of medicines retention and disposal practices in Australian homes
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5753-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fiona Kelly, Sara McMillan, Jean Spinks, Emilie Bettington, Amanda J. Wheeler

Abstract

Consumers most commonly discard unwanted medicines in household rubbish or drains, however, there are global concerns over the extent, environmental impact and health risks. When consumers procure or store medicines for future use, this can impact negatively on quality use of medicines and consumer safety. We sought greater insight into the extent of these practices by exploring the volume and types of medicines in Australian homes, and self-reported practices related to medicine accumulation, use and disposal. This qualitative study formed part of a larger project that included a general population survey on household medicine disposal practices. Semi-structured telephone interviews were undertaken with a subset of respondents (n = 166) from the survey. Participants were eligible if they were experienced medicine users, i.e. used five or more prescribed, over the counter, and/or complementary and alternative medicines. Participants were asked to collect and name all medicines in their household; further detail was obtained about medicines used only when required or no longer used, such as expiry dates and quantity remaining. The quantitative data on the number and type of medicines stored at home were analysed descriptively. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. A total of 2301 medicines were identified as 1424 medicines not in everyday use (unused, unwanted, expired or when required) in 166 households, and 877 regularly used medicines by 119 participants. Medicines were often stored in multiple locations, particularly kitchens. Although accidental ingestion in children and pets and decreased efficacy were recognised health risks, this did not always translate to appropriate storage, usage or disposal practices. Individual risk-benefit assessments were applied to decisions to retain, use or dispose of medicines, including expired medicines. Inappropriate medicine storage, use, and/or disposal practices raises public health concerns, particularly as there is a free returned medicines scheme available, and that this particular participant group were considered experienced medicine users. Healthcare professionals must act to address consumer misconceptions around the quality use of medicines, including medicine retention, storage and disposal. Future research is warranted to explore consumer practices in this context and confirm these findings in a younger, or healthier population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 17%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Lecturer 9 7%
Researcher 6 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 48 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 27 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Environmental Science 7 6%
Psychology 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 52 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,423,597
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,479
of 15,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,376
of 333,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#225
of 283 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,064 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 283 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.