METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, face to face interview-based survey using a structured questionnaire. We used a convenience sampling method to recruit participants from Kuala Lumpur and Selangor in Malaysia.
RESULTS: We interviewed 1184 participants, and the response rate was 96%. Out of the total respondents, 995 (84%) reported having unused medicines. About a quarter of respondents kept unused medicines in the cabinet, and another quarter disposed of them into the trash or toilet. Only half of the respondent who used medicines for chronic illnesses had unused medicines compared to about 90% of respondents who used medicines for acute illnesses. The main reason for having unused medicines among those who used medicines for chronic illness was non-adherence (69%, p
METHODS: We conducted searches in Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, from database inception to June 2023.
RESULTS: The review included 27 studies spanning 15 countries' medicine take-back programmes. While some programmes, mostly observed in the USA, were conducted at the local level with non-health-associated facilities, others were done at the national level within healthcare facilities. The cost of collected medicines ranged from US$7,416 to US$1,118,020, primarily involving medicines related to the nervous system, cardiovascular system, alimentary tract, and metabolism. Legislations pertaining to these programmes were available in the USA, most European countries, and Mexico, but unavailable in Spain, Austria, Australia, and New Zealand. However, despite this, the government or the industry in these countries managed the programmes.
CONCLUSION: Well-structured take-back programmes featuring easily accessible collection points, regular collection schedules, clear programme ownership, with legislation defining financial responsibilities, showed positive outcomes.