Recent legislative change has allowed increased access to cannabis products in many jurisdictions. In some locations, this includes over-the-counter (OTC) and/or online access to products containing cannabidiol (CBD), a non-intoxicating cannabinoid with therapeutic properties. Here we compared the availability of CBD products and the associated legislative and regulatory background in nine selected countries. Accessibility of CBD products was examined in the USA, Canada, Germany, Ireland, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand as of May 2020. Regulatory and other relevant documents were obtained from government agency websites and related sources. Relevant commercial websites and some physical retailers were visited to verify access to CBD-containing products and the nature of the products available. A range of CBD products appeared to be accessible without prescription in seven out of nine countries reviewed. Australia and New Zealand were the exceptions where clinician prescription was required to access any CBD-containing product. CBD products commonly available without prescription included oils, gel capsules, purified crystal and topical products. The daily recommended doses with orally administered non-prescription products were typically well below 150 mg and substantially lower than the doses reported to have therapeutic effects in published clinical trials (e.g., 300-1500 mg). The legal foundations enabling access in several countries were often unclear, with marketed products sometimes failing to meet legal requirements for sale. There was an obvious disparity between federal directives and available products in both the USA and European countries examined. There are a variety of approaches in how countries manage access to CBD products. Many countries appear to permit OTC and online availability of CBD products but often without legislative clarity. As consumer demand for CBD escalates, improved legislation, guidelines and quality control of CBD products would seem prudent together with clinical trials exploring the therapeutic benefits of lower-dose CBD formulations.

Switching or reclassifying medicines with established safety profiles from prescription to non-prescription aims to increase timely consumer access to medicines, reduce under-treatment and enhance self-management. However, risks include suboptimal therapy and adverse effects. With a long-standing government policy supporting switching or reclassifying medicines from prescription to non-prescription, the United Kingdom is believed to lead the world in switch, but evidence for this is inconclusive. Interest in switching medicines for certain long-term conditions has arisen in the United Kingdom, United States, and Europe, but such switches have been contentious. The objective of this study was then to provide a comprehensive comparison of progress in switch for medicines across six developed countries: the United States; the United Kingdom; Australia; Japan; the Netherlands; and New Zealand. A list of prescription-to-non-prescription medicine switches was systematically compiled. Three measures were used to compare switch activity across the countries: “progressive” switches from 2003 to 2013 (indicating incremental consumer benefit over current non-prescription medicines); “first-in-world” switches from 2003 to 2013; and switch date comparisons for selected medicines. New Zealand was the most active in progressive switches from 2003 to 2013, with the United Kingdom and Japan not far behind. The United States, Australia and the Netherlands showed the least activity in this period. Few medicines for long-term conditions were switched, even in the United Kingdom and New Zealand where first-in-world switches were most likely. Switch of certain medicines took considerably longer in some countries than others. For example, a consumer in the United Kingdom could self-medicate with a non-sedating antihistamine 19 years earlier than a consumer in the United States. Proactivity in medicines switching, most notably in New Zealand and the United Kingdom, questions missed opportunities to enhance consumers' self-management in countries such as the United States.

The uptake of maternal influenza and pertussis vaccinations is often suboptimal. This study explores the factors influencing pregnant women’s and health care professionals’ (HCPs) behaviour regarding maternal vaccinations (MVs). Pregnant/recently pregnant women, midwives, pharmacists and general practice staff in Waikato, New Zealand, were interviewed. The analysis used the behaviour change wheel model. Interviews of 18 women and 35 HCPs revealed knowledge about MVs varied with knowledge deficiencies hindering the uptake, particularly for influenza vaccination. HCPs, especially midwives, were key in raising women’s awareness of MVs. Experience with vaccinating, hospital work (for midwives) and training increased HCPs’ knowledge and proactivity about MVs. A “woman’s choice” philosophy saw midwives typically encouraging women to seek information and make their own decision. Women’s decisions were generally based on knowledge, beliefs, HCPs’ emphasis and their perceived risk, with little apparent influence from friends, family, or online or promotional material. General practice’s concentration on children’s vaccination and minimal antenatal contact limited proactivity with MVs. Busyness and prioritisation appeared to affect HCPs’ proactivity. Multi-pronged interventions targeting HCPs and pregnant women and increasing MV access are needed. All HCPs seeing pregnant women should be well-informed about MVs, including how to identify and address women’s questions or concerns about MVs to optimise uptake.

INTRODUCTION In New Zealand, pertussis vaccination is recommended and government-funded during every pregnancy to protect the infant after birth. However, uptake is low and needs to be increased. AIM To investigate enablers and barriers for uptake of the pertussis vaccination by pregnant women in New Zealand, and explore the acceptability of provision in pharmacies. METHODS Women with infants were recruited in selected pharmacies and interviewed using abrief structured interview. Transcripts were analysed using a framework approach. RESULTS Thirty-seven women aged 18–43 years provided data for analysis. Seventeen women reported receiving a pertussis vaccination during their pregnancy. Information from health professionals appeared important to encourage vaccination, but other sources of information (eg antenatal groups and media) were also cited. Non-vaccination arose from being unaware of the need for pertussis vaccination during pregnancy, concerns about safety, and misinformation. Participants supported pertussis vaccination in pharmacies to help access or increase the opportunity for health professionals to inform women. DISCUSSION The information received by participants affected their uptake of the pertussis vaccine during pregnancy. Education of the public and health professionals about the pertussis vaccine during pregnancy is necessary.