ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2026
A mixed-methods study of patient grievances with phlebotomy services at a tertiary care hospital in eastern India.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient satisfaction with phlebotomy services is an important indicator of healthcare quality and efficiency. It reflects not only clinical standards but also environmental and interpersonal dimensions of care. Understanding patient experiences can guide meaningful improvements in diagnostic service delivery, especially in high-volume public hospitals. The aim of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with phlebotomy services in a tertiary care hospital, identify critical factors influencing perceptions, and highlight specific areas requiring enhancement. MATERIALS AND
methodsA sequential mixed-methods, cross-sectional survey was conducted among 100 patients visiting the phlebotomy section at All India Institute of Medical Sciences Gorakhpur, a tertiary care institute in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. A 35-item structured questionnaire was administered in English or Hindi, according to participant preference. The tool included both closed-ended questions rated on a 3-point Likert scale and open-ended items capturing qualitative feedback. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS, and thematic analysis was applied to open-ended responses. Gender-specific patterns in satisfaction were also explored.
resultsHigh levels of satisfaction were reported for hygiene practices (96%-99%), staff professionalism (94%-96%), and information sharing (77%). The availability of required laboratory tests was positively rated by 79% of participants. However, areas of concern included long waiting times (28% dissatisfaction) and toilet cleanliness (18% dissatisfaction). Thematic analysis revealed that staff attitude, cleanliness, communication, and waiting time were dominant influences on patient satisfaction, whereas pain and procedural delays emerged as common grievances. Gender-based analysis revealed that female patients expressed higher satisfaction with staff behavior and communication, whereas male patients were more satisfied with procedural and diagnostic efficiency.
conclusionThe study not only found overall high patient satisfaction with phlebotomy services but also identified actionable gaps in waiting time management, sanitation, and communication. Targeted improvements in these areas, especially with gender-sensitive approaches, can further enhance the patient experience and align phlebotomy services with patient-centered care models in tertiary care settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.