Index testing is part of the strategies to identify individuals who are infected with HIV through their HIV-positive contacts.

Optimal index testing services depend largely on the ability to elicit sexual contacts from HIV-positive clients.

Because some clients do not feel comfortable reporting their contacts, a low elicitation rate has been implicated in suboptimal testing of index contacts.

The introduction of an elicitation box, in which an HIV-positive index can report sexual contacts on paper and insert in a box for a health care provider to contact at a later time, was expected to increase the elicitation rate of index contacts.

Compared to the conventional elicitation model, the elicitation box model was found to be more likely to increase the rate of partners elicited, particularly for index clients with multiple sexual contacts.

Background: This analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of eliciting sexual partners from HIV-positive clients using the elicitation box model (where an HIV-positive index can report sexual contacts on paper and insert in a box for a health care provider to contact at a later time) compared to the conventional model (in which a health care provider elicits sexual contacts directly from clients) in Akwa Ibom, Southern Nigeria.

Methods: Between March 2021 and April 2022, data were collected from index testing registers at 4 health facilities with a high volume of HIV clients currently on treatment in 4 local government areas in Akwa Ibom State. Primary outcome analyzed was the elicitation ratio (number of partners elicited per HIV-index offered index testing services). Secondary outcomes were the index testing acceptance (index HIV-positive clients accepted index testing service), testing coverage (partners tested for HIV from a list of partners elicited from HIV-index accepted index testing services), testing yield (index partners identified HIV positive from index partners HIV-tested), and linkage rate (index partners identified HIV positive and linked to antiretroviral therapy).

Results: Of the total 2,705 index clients offered index testing services, 91.9% accepted, with 2,043 and 439 indexes opting for conventional elicitation and elicitation box models, respectively. A total of 3,796 sexual contacts were elicited: 2,546 using the conventional model (elicitation ratio=1:1) and 1,250 using the elicitation box model (elicitation ratio=1:3). Testing coverage was significantly higher in the conventional compared to the elicitation box model (P<.001). However, there was no significant difference in the testing yield (P=.81) and linkage rate using the conventional compared to elicitation box models (P=.13).

Conclusion: The implementation of the elicitation box model resulted in an increase in partner elicitation compared to the conventional model. Increasing the testing coverage by implementing the elicitation box model should be considered.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly cited. To view a copy of the license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. When linking to this article, please use the following permanent link: https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-24-00013