Review explores sustainable menstrual hygiene packaging alternatives, their assessments, and regulatory issues.
Menstrual hygiene products, particularly disposable sanitary pads, contribute significantly to global plastic waste due to their high polymer content and limited recyclability. While considerable attention has been directed toward biodegradable absorbent cores, the environmental impact of packaging materials—especially plastic wrappers—remains under explored. This review critically examines recent advancements in sustainable packaging alternatives for menstrual hygiene products, with emphasis on plant-derived fibers, protein-based films, and Polysaccharides bio polymers. The functional performance of these materials is evaluated in terms of mechanical strength, barrier properties, biodegradability, and shelf-life stability.[1],[2],[3] In addition, the review integrates life cycle assessment (LCA) perspectives to compare environmental burdens associated with conventional and bio-based packaging systems. Particular attention is given to regulatory and safety considerations, including Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) requirements, biocompatibility, and compliance with packaging standards for hygiene products. Industrial scalability, cost constraints, and consumer acceptance are also analyzed as critical factors influencing commercialization.[4],[5],[6] Emerging innovations such as nano-biocomposites, multilayer biodegradable films, and smart packaging technologies are discussed to highlight future directions. By synthesizing material science, environmental assessment, and regulatory frameworks, this review provides a comprehensive roadmap for transitioning toward sustainable menstrual hygiene packaging systems that align with global environmental and public health goals.[7]
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ms. Vaishnavi Arun Narawade*, Mr. Ganesh Lamkhade, Mr. Tejas Patil, Ms. Jayashree Zaware, Ms. Yogita Warghade (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: