Evaluation of Rapid HIV Self-Testing: Qualitative and User Proficiency Assessments

Form Approved

OMB No. 0920-0840

Expiration Date: 00/00/0000

Evaluation of Rapid HIV Self-Testing: Qualitative and User Proficiency Assessments

Generic Information Collection Request under 0920-0840

Attachment 1c

In-Depth Interview Guide

Public reporting burden of this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to CDC/ATSDR Reports Clearance Officer; 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS D-74, Atlanta, Georgia 30333; Attn: OMB-PRA (0920-0840)

In-Depth Interview Guide

Introduction: Hello, may name is [name] and I am a researcher at Emory University. We appreciate your willingness to help us as we develop a new kind of HIV testing product for men in our community.

During the next hour, I’m going to show you an example of a product that will be for guys to test themselves for HIV at home and read their test results. This is like a home test women do for pregnancy, or a test people do to check their blood sugar at home. In the future, it might be possible to buy an at-home test kit like this in a drug store, or to get one from the health department or a community-based organization. In the next year, we will also be doing a research study of at-home testing, in which we will mail out home test kits to men around the United States.

Today, we’re most interested in your ideas about how the test kits are packaged and if you understand the procedures for conducting self-testing. Imagine that you were participating in an Emory research study, and that the box I’m going to show you came in the mail for your use in the study. We’re going to have you look at the instruction materials (paper and a video) that we have prepared for guys who will use the tests, and we’ll ask you to talk through those instructions and tell us your understanding of how you would test yourself with the different test kits. You won’t actually test yourself. I am going to listen and I may ask you questions as you interact with the test kits and talk through what you would do with the test kits.

Here is the box that would come in the mail. Please open it as you would if you received it at home. As you see each of the contents in the box, please talk out loud about what you are seeing, what you understand you are supposed to do with the contents, and in what order. As we mentioned in the consent, we’ll also be videotaping your hands and the work area; this will help us understand better what you are seeing and doing as you describe how you would use the kits.

At this point, please do not actually open the tests; please just tell me about what you understand about what you need to do with the materials in the box. We’ll actually open the individual tests a little later.

[The participant is given the box. Interviewer will record the participant’s comments on the materials. If the participant is not verbalizing comments on the materials, the interviewer will prompt with open-ended prompts such as: “Please tell me which part of the kit you are looking at, and what you are supposed to do with it.” “Please remember to talk out loud about what you are seeing, and what you are supposed to do with what you see.” “Please tell me if there’s anything that is unclear about the kit, or what you are supposed to do with it.”

After the participant has removed all of the kit contents and talked about what he understands he is supposed to do with them, ask:

“Are there any of the steps in the instructions that you think could be made more clear?” Use open-ended probes to elicit information about the nature of what was not clear, and how the participant thinks it could be made clearer.

2