Background: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of the quality, effectiveness, and patient-centeredness of healthcare services. Assessing patients’ perspectives can help identify service gaps and guide quality improvement. Objective was to assess patients’ perspectives and satisfaction with outpatient department (OPD) healthcare services and to explore their suggestions for improving patient care at a tertiary-care public hospital in Chandigarh, India. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among patients attending OPDs of a tertiary-care government hospital in Chandigarh from April to December 2025. Patients who consented to participate or their attendants were interviewed using a self-designed semi-structured interview schedule to collect information on socio-demographic characteristics, waiting time, patient experiences, satisfaction, problems encountered, staff behaviour, and suggestions. Results: A total of 1069 respondents including 53.6% females and 46.4% males were interviewed. Overall, 70.9% respondents were satisfied with OPD healthcare services, 16.6% were less satisfied, and 12.5% were not satisfied. Overcrowding (53.8%) and long waiting time (49.0%) were the most frequently reported problems. Overall, 72.8% reported at least one undesired experience, whereas 80.4% reported positive experiences. Good behaviour of doctors was the most commonly reported positive experience (29.8%), followed by quality patient care (14.4%). Importantly, 85.8% respondents reported that they would recommend the hospital’s services to others. Conclusions: System-level limitations continue to be significant obstacles to a better OPD experience, despite the fact that overall patient satisfaction was encouraging. To maintain patient satisfaction, it is important to prioritize reducing crowding and waiting times, enhancing waiting places, parking, medicine availability, diagnostic services, and organizational management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kumar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: