Survey on client satisfaction at Centre Pasteur Cameroon
Killa Claris1*, Kaiyen Afi Leslie2, TANGA Grace3
1Department of Laboratory, Bsc Biochemistry, HPD medical laboratory sciences, Msc Health sciences, Cameroon
2Department of Medical research, Bsc medical laboratory science, Msc Health sciences, United Kingdom
3Department of Quality assurance, Msc in quality assurance, Cameroon
*Corresponding author
*Killa Claris, Department of Laboratory, Bsc Biochemistry, HPD medical laboratory sciences, Msc Health
sciences, Cameroon
DOI: 10.55920/JCRMHS.2022.02.001084

The different figures illustrating this table are found below
Professionalism of personnel
We observed a total satisfaction of 79.8% (851 ∕ 1067) and dissatisfaction of 20.2% (216 ∕ 1067) (figure 1) with a mean of 1.0 and standard deviation of 0.7

Respect of confidentiality
At this level a total satisfaction of 90.7% (968 ∕ 1067) was observed and dissatisfaction of 9.3% (99 ∕ 1067) (Figure 2) with a mean of 0.7 and a standard deviation of 0.7

Comfort of the various departments
As far as the comfort of the various departments is concerned a total satisfaction of 89.0% (950 ∕ 1067) and dissatisfaction of 11.0% (117 ∕ 1067) (Figure 3) was observed with a mean of 0.8 and a standard deviation of 0.6

Waiting time lapse
There was a total satisfaction of 60.5% (646 ∕ 1067) and dissatisfaction of 39.5% (421 ∕ 1067) (Figure 4) with a mean of 1.4 and standard deviation of 0.9

Quality of phone reception
A total satisfaction of 88.4% (943 ∕ 1067) and dissatisfaction of 11.6% (124 ∕ 1067) (Figure 5) was observed with a mean of 0.5 and a standard deviation of 0.8

Result representation of the different domains of the collection bench
The results are given in frequencies and in percentages (Table II). Here sample collection scored the highest satisfaction of 93.2% (994 ∕ 1067) as compared to handling of emergency which scored the lowest with 82.7% (882∕1067).

The different figures illustrating this table are found below
Sample collection
A good representation of 93.2% total satisfaction (47.2% very satisfactory and 46.0% satisfactory) and dissatisfaction of 6.8% being 5.6% mediocre and 1.2% (Figure 6) poor with a mean of 0.6 and standard deviation of 0.6

Handling of emergency
There was a total satisfaction of 82.7% (60.0% very satisfactory and 22.7% satisfactory) and dissatisfaction of 17.3% (12.4% mediocre and 4.9% poor) (Figure 7) with a mean of 0.6 and standard deviation of 0.9

Result representation of the different domains of the result withdrawal bench
The results are given in frequencies and in percentages (Table III). There was a percentage satisfaction of 88.7% (946 ∕ 1067) for the entire service as compared to result release deadline which scored a 73.4% (783 ∕ 1067) satisfaction.

The different figures illustrating this table are found below
Result release deadline
We had a total satisfaction of 73.4% (25.4% very satisfactory and 48.0% satisfactory) and dissatisfaction of 26.6% (18.5% mediocre and 8.1% poor) (Figure 8) with a mean of 1.1 and standard deviation of 0.9

The entire service
A total satisfaction of 88.7% (12.6% very satisfactory and 76.1% satisfactory) and dissatisfaction of 11.3% (9.9% mediocre and 1.4% poor) (Figure 9) was observed with a mean of 1.0 and standard deviation of 0.5

Representation of the distribution of the results of the different departments of the service
There was a 93.2% (994 ∕ 1067) satisfaction for the realization of sample collection which was the highest score as compared to the waiting time lapse which scored a 60.5% (646 ∕ 1067) satisfaction(the lowest score) (Table IV)

The different figures illustrating this table are found below
General results
Sample collection scored the highest percentage of satisfaction being 93.2% (994 ∕ 1067) and waiting time lapse scored the lowest satisfaction of 60.5% ( 646 ∕ 1067) (Figure 10 ).

From the results below we see that 35.6% of the clients were very satisfied, 47.3% satisfied which gives a total satisfaction of 82.9% (885 ∕ 1067) and dissatisfaction 12.6% mediocre and 4.4% poor giving a total dissatisfaction of 17.1% ( 182 ∕ 1067) (Figure 11)

From the results below we see that there was a satisfaction of 82.9% and dissatisfaction of 17.1%. (Figure 12 )

This figure shows the satisfaction perceived of the different criteria of the service summed up to 100.0%. (Figure 13)

This figure shows the dissatisfaction perceived of the different criteria of the service summed up to 100.0%. (Figure 14)

A view of those who gave and did not give suggestions/comments for amelioration.
From the table we see that 72.1% of our clients did not give suggestions for amelioration whereas 27.9% did .(Table V)

Distribution of comments/suggestions for amelioration
From the table we see that of those who gave suggestions, the highest 31.8 % (340 ∕ 1067) suggested on the amelioration of the courtesy of personnel and the lowest 0.1 % (2 ∕ 1067) on the realization of sample collection (Table VI)

The figure illustrating this table is found below. From the figure the suggestions concerning the amelioration of the courtesy of personnel was 31.8% (highest score) and that for sample collection 0.1% (lowest score) (Figure 15)

- Adsit, D. (2007), "What the Call Center Industry Can Learn from Manufacturing: Part I". National Association of Call Centers’, Retrieved December 2012.
- Andaleeb, S. (2001), Service quality perceptions and patient satisfaction: a study of hospitals in a developing country. Social Science Medicine, Vol.52, pp. 1359–1370.
- ATOUTBIO: BRIGNON AND THOMAS 2012.
- Bernhart, M.H., Wiadnyana, I.G. and Wihardjo, H. (1999), ‘Patient satisfaction in developing countries’. Social Science Medicine, Vol. 48, pp.989–996.
- DEMING. (2001), ‘Le Créateur De La Qualité Totale’, accessed August 2005.
- Dreux, C. (2008) ‘L'avenir de la biologie médicale en France bulletin Academique’. Natle Médecine, Tome. 192 N°, 6, pp. 1261à1276.
- ESGM. (2000),’ Le Sphinx’, accessed June 2005.
- Faison, C., Horlick, J., Merkel, W. and White, V. (2006), National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation 15th ed.
- FBC. (1997), ‘Serving the American Public Best Practices in Customer Driven Strategic Planning’, accessed 2003.
- FAO. (1992), ‘Conduite de petites enquêtes nutritionnelles Manuel de terrain Rome’, accessed May 1998
- Francis, P., Muzaffer, U. and Vincent, P. (2010) ‘Tourist customer service satisfaction: An encounter approach, 1st ed., Advances in tourism.
- Hanan, M. and Karp, P. (1989), ‘Customer Satisfaction: How to Maximize, Measure, and Market Your Company’s “Ultimate Product” American Management Association, Vol. 9, pp. 9.
- Herve, L. and Vilcot, C. (2013). ‘Mesure de la satisfaction du client’. Qualité, métrologie, client fournisseur Tome.72 No, 1, pp. 1à10.
- ISO 15189. (2012), ‘Medical laboratories, demands concerning quality and competence’, accessed June 2013
- ISO 9000. (2005), ‘Quality management systems, essential principles and vocabulary’, accessed February 2006
- ISO 9001. (2010), ‘Dépasser la conformité pour aller vers l’efficacité’ La satisfaction client ou l’importance de la qualité perçue, accessed July 31, 2011.
- ISO 9001. (2000), ‘Quality management systems requirements’, accessed October 2001.
- ISO 9001. (2008), ‘Quality management systems requirements’, accessed September 2009.
- ISO 9004. ( 2009), ‘Managing for the sustained success of an organization – A quality’, accessed August 2010.
- Ja, P.I., Kouri, T.T. and Pakarinen, A.J. (2009), ‘Utilization of customer feedback in a university hospital laboratory’, Accreditation Quality Assurance, Vol, 14, pp.193–197.
- Jones, B.A., Bekeris, L.G. and Nakhleh, R.E. (2009), ‘Physician satisfaction with clinical laboratory services: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 138 institutions’. Arch Pathology Laboratory Medicine, Vol, 133, pp. 38–43.
- Jones, B.A., Walsh, M.K. and Ruby, S.G. (2006), ‘Hospital nursing satisfaction with clinical laboratory services: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 162 Institutions’. Arch Pathology Laboratory Medicine. Vol, 130, pp.1756–1761.
- Kaldenberg, D. and Regrut, B. (1999), “Do Satisfied Patients Depend On Satisfied Employees? Or, Do Satisfied Employees Depend On Satisfied Patients?” The Satisfaction Report, vol, 3, pp 3.
- Krebs, G. (2014), ‘Paru dans Tendances Qualité’, Client interne, client externe même combat, Tome. 1 N° 37, pp 1.
- Marinescu, M.A. (2010), ‘Continuous Improvement in Implementing Public Funded Projects; Proceedings of the 17th IGWT Symposium “Facing the Challenges of the Future’, Excellence in Business and Commodity Science”, Vol.1 No 1, pp. 337-381.
- NPR. (1996), ‘Serving the American People: Best Practices in Resolving Customer Complaints’, accessed January 1997.
- NRCPI. (2004), ‘Patient Experience vs. Patient Nick Wreden: What’s Better than Customer Satisfaction?” Viewpoint’, accessed May 24, 2004.
- OMS. (2014), ‘Fiche contenu 13-1 vue d’ensemble du service clients’, accessed September 2014.
- Rodrigo, A. (1996), “Literature Review on Consumer Satisfaction in Modern Marketing.”, accessed December 5, 1996,
- Ron, Z. and Dick, S. (1989), ‘The Service Edge: 101Companies that Profit from Customer Care’, accessed January 1990.
- Schaaf, D. (1995),’ Keeping the Edge: Giving Customers the Service they Demand’, accessed September 1996.
- Schneider, B. and Bowen, D. (1995), ‘Winning the Service Game’, Seminar in Consumer Research, Faculty of Commerce and Administration, Concordia, Vol. 34 No 3, pp. 463–465.
- Smith, M. and Engelbrecht, B. (2001), ‘Guide to assessing Client Satisfaction at District Hospitals’, accessed June 2001.
- TDMR, INC. (2012), “The Voice of the Customer: Improving Customer Service and Satisfaction’, International journal of research in commerce and management, Vol. 8 No 3, pp. 6– 8.
- THEA. (2005),’European Approaches and Experiences with User Involvement and Customer Satisfaction in Social Services’, accessed May 2005.
- Thomas, C. and Truax, P. (2001), ‘Surprises, Humility and Rising Rankings: The Satisfaction Monitor ‘, accessed March/April 2001.
- UPTON. (2002), “What Your Customers Want,” accessed May 2002.
- Zerah, S. and Vassault, A. (2012), ‘Management de la qualité dans les laboratoires d'analyses de Biologie Médicale’, accessed November 2012.