Self-Medication Among Pharmacy Technician Trainees in Nigeria: Overconfidence, Risk, and the Path to Rational Drug Use

When future healthcare providers self-medicate, what does it mean for rational drug use and public health?

Share this post

Choose a social network to share with, or copy the URL to share elsewhere

This is a representation of how your post may appear on social media. The actual post will vary between social networks

Explore the Research

BioMed Central
BioMed Central BioMed Central

Self-medication among pharmacy technician students in Offa, Nigeria: implications for rational drug use and future healthcare practice

Background Self-medication, defined as the use of medicines without prior medical consultation regarding indication, dosage, or duration of treatment, is a common practice worldwide and is recognized by the World Health Organization as part of self-care. While appropriate self-medication may help in the management of minor illnesses, inappropriate use can result in adverse drug reactions, incorrect drug selection, drug interactions, antimicrobial resistance, and increased risk of dependence. The prevalence of self-medication among university students has been reported to be high in many countries, particularly in developing regions where access to medicines without prescription is common. Despite the public health implications, there is limited data on self-medication practices among pharmacy technician students in Nigeria. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and describe the patterns of self-medication among pharmacy technician students, including commonly used medications, reported reasons for self-medication, and awareness of potential risks. Methods A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among pharmacy technician students at Kwara State College of Health Technology, Offa, Nigeria, between March and May 2025. Data were collected using a structured self-administered questionnaire assessing socio-demographic characteristics, self-medication practices, commonly used medications, reasons for self-medication, and awareness of associated risks. The sample size was determined using Cochran’s formula for estimating a single population proportion, with finite population correction applied because the accessible population was less than 10,000. Participants were selected using convenience sampling among eligible students who were present during the study period and consented to participate. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and presented as frequencies and percentages. Results Of the 140 respondents, 126 (90.0%) reported practising self-medication. The most commonly used medicines were analgesics/antacids (60.0%) and antibiotics (30.0%). The leading reasons for self-medication were convenience (25.0%), cost saving (25.0%), and lack of time (20.0%). Although 75.0% of respondents reported awareness of the risks associated with self-medication, 30.0% reported experiencing adverse effects following self-medication. Conclusion Self-medication is highly prevalent among pharmacy technician students. Despite adequate knowledge about medicines, students frequently self-medicate due to convenience, accessibility, and perceived minor illness. Educational interventions, stricter regulation of drug sales, and improved access to healthcare services are necessary to reduce irrational self-medication practices.

When future healthcare providers self-medicate, what does it mean for rational drug use and public health? Our newly published study in BMC Public Health explores the hidden prevalence, underlying drivers, and institutional policy implications among pharmacy technician students in Offa, Kwara State, Nigeria.

Read the full open-access article in BMC Public Health: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-026-29552-x

Pharmacy technicians occupy a critical frontline position in global health systems, particularly across sub-Saharan Africa, where they routinely dispense medications, counsel patients, and manage community drug supplies. However, an intriguing paradox exists: Does acquiring early pharmaceutical knowledge encourage rational self-care, or does it breed overconfidence that leads to risky self-medication practices?

In our latest study published in BMC Public Health, we examined self-medication behaviors among pharmacy technician students in Offa, Nigeria.

Core Takeaways & Public Health Implications:

  • The "Knowledge-Practice Paradox": Trainees often leverage early clinical training to self-diagnose and self-prescribe—frequently bypassing formal healthcare consultations.
  • Medication Patterns & AMR Risks: Widespread, unmonitored use of prescription-only drugs, analgesics, and antimalarials raises major concerns regarding adverse drug reactions, inappropriate dosing, and the acceleration of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
  • Curricular & Policy Imperatives: The findings underscore an urgent need to embed robust rational drug use (RDU) modules, bioethics, and institutional health policies directly into allied health science curricula.

Addressing self-medication at the trainee level is vital for safeguarding future healthcare workers and ensuring they model the rational prescribing standards they are expected to uphold in practice.

Follow the Topic

Health Policy
Life Sciences > Health Sciences > Public Health > Health Policy
Drug Safety and Pharmacovigilance
Life Sciences > Health Sciences > Public Health > Drug Safety and Pharmacovigilance
Pharmacy
Life Sciences > Health Sciences > Pharmacy
Health Administration
Life Sciences > Health Sciences > Public Health > Health Administration

Related Collections

With Collections, you can get published faster and increase your visibility.

HIV stigma

BMC Public Health is calling for submissions to our Collection on HIV stigma, which remains a critical barrier to achieving optimal health outcomes for individuals living with HIV. Stigma undermines their quality of life, access to healthcare, and overall well-being. Despite significant advancements in treatment and prevention, discrimination and stigma continue to perpetuate fear, isolation, and misinformation within communities.

The urgency to address HIV stigma is heightened in the context of global health initiatives, as we strive for a more inclusive society where individuals living with HIV are empowered, well-informed, and treated with dignity. This Collection aims to gather cutting-edge research and diverse perspectives that illuminate the multifaceted nature of HIV stigma, highlighting the intersections of culture, policy, and public health that shape the experiences of those affected.

The Collection welcomes scholarship that not only documents stigma but also advances new ways of understanding and responding to it. We particularly invite work that examines stigma as a social, structural, and relational force that shapes care, rights, intimacy, and everyday life for people living with HIV.

The scope of this Collection encompasses a range of topics related to HIV stigma, including but not limited to:

  • Qualitative research that foregrounds the knowledge, agency, and perspectives of people living with HIV and others affected by stigma
  • Psychosocial dimensions of stigma experienced by people living with HIV
  • The role of HIV awareness campaigns in combating stigma
  • Innovative and community engaged approaches to measuring or addressing stigma
  • Policy analyses addressing stigma in healthcare settings
  • Intersectional analyses of stigma across gender, sexuality, age and migration, social, environmental or structural determinants of health contributing to discrimination
  • Impacts of digital spaces, media narratives, and global health governance on stigma

This Collection supports and amplifies research related to SDG 3: Good Health & Well-being and SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities. We strongly encourage submissions from the global south and from teams that include community partners and lived experience experts.

All manuscripts submitted to this journal, including those submitted to collections and special issues, are assessed in line with our editorial policies and the journal’s peer-review process. Reviewers and editors are required to declare competing interests and can be excluded from the peer review process if a competing interest exists.

Publishing Model: Open Access

Deadline: Dec 01, 2026

Digital exclusion and health equity

Digital exclusion poses significant barriers to health equity, particularly in the context of an increasingly technology-driven healthcare landscape. Many individuals, especially from underserved communities face challenges in accessing digital health resources, including telehealth services, electronic health records, and health information online, alongside challenges from other social determinants of health. This Collection seeks to explore the intersection of digital health access and health equity, focusing on the disparities that arise from unequal access to digital tools and resources.

Addressing digital health exclusion is critical for promoting health equity and ensuring that all individuals can benefit from advancements in digital health. Recent strides in telehealth and digital health interventions have demonstrated the potential for technology to improve access to care, yet they also reveal significant disparities that must be acknowledged. By understanding the factors that contribute to eHealth disparities, we can develop targeted digital inclusion strategies that address the unique needs of diverse populations, ultimately fostering a more equitable health system.

Topics for submission include but are not limited to:

  • Equitable digital health systems: policy, infrastructure, and community engagement
  • Digital health access among underserved communities
  • Digital literacy and health outcomes across diverse populations
  • Innovations and implementation strategies for bridging digital health gaps in underserved communities
  • Measuring and monitoring digital health disparities: metrics and methodologies

This Collection supports and amplifies research related to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well Being) and SDG 10: (Reduced Inequalities).

All manuscripts submitted to this journal, including those submitted to collections and special issues, are assessed in line with our editorial policies and the journal’s peer-review process. Reviewers and editors are required to declare competing interests and can be excluded from the peer review process if a competing interest exists.

Publishing Model: Open Access

Deadline: Dec 11, 2026