Table 1

Summary of process evaluation

	Method of evaluation	Partner notification (PN) method
		Routine		APTHotline		APTPharmacy
		Clinic A	Clinic B	Clinic A	Clinic B	Clinic A	Clinic B
*Outcome*
Patient acceptability	Index follow-up telephone interview 4–6 weeks after diagnosis^*	x	x	x	x	x	x
	Contact follow-up telephone interview 4–6 weeks after diagnosis^†			x	x	x	x
	Observation and timing of recruitment practice^‡	x	x	x	x	x	x
Patient feasibility	Index follow-up telephone interview 4–6 weeks after diagnosis^*	x	x	x	x	x	x
	Contact follow-up telephone interview 4–6 weeks after diagnosis^†			x	x	x	x
	‘Mystery shopper’ telephone call			x	x
Provider acceptability	Interviews with clinic staff and community pharmacists during and after trial^§			x	x	x	x
Provider feasibility	Interviews with clinic staff and community pharmacists during and after trial^§			x	x	x	x

↵* Questions included acceptability and feasibility of the PN method used, whether the index would choose that method of PN again, index-reported PN outcomes.
↵† Questions included acceptability and feasibility of the PN method used, whether the contact would be happy with that method of PN again, timing of treatment and reasons for this, whether the contact had sought testing for HIV and syphilis after receiving APT and reasons for not doing so.
↵‡ Study researcher observed clinic health advisers as they sought consent from eligible index patients. Health advisers recorded duration of consent process.
↵§ Questions included acceptability and feasibility of the recruitment process, opinions on elements of APT interventions.
APT, Accelerated Partner Therapy.