Phlebotomy or Volunteer at a hospital?

[deleted593848]

So I just recently finished my phlebotomy course and I have an internship that goes with it in 2 weeks at a clinic. Before I took the phlebotomy route, I applied to a hospital near my folks place about 4 months ago, and they finally contacted me about a week ago. Now I was excited but i just finished the interview and they are interested kinda of, but now I have some douths. The volunteer coordinator, who is also a volunter lol, told me it would be hard to travel from my college, which is UCSC, to their facility and I would have to make a year commitment. Now I would love to do it, since there are no hospital volunter opp. in or around Santa Cruz, but I am now wondering if I am doing too much. Now phlebotomy, after I get my state license, would allow me to work at the local hospital near my school or at the University clinic, but I would have to wait till my second quarter of sophomore year, since I will be waiting for my licenses. So the question I am trying to ask is, should I stick with phlebotomy, since it will enable me to get more hands on experience, or should I just volunter at the hospital that is an hour away from my University and make a commitment with that?
Additional info about the volunter opp: If I volunter at the hospital the process for this hospital goes as follows. So first I would have to do 24 hours of a probation period. After that, then I would be reviewed by a board of volunter staff and they determine if I can get an interview for the trauma center, which is where I want to volunter at. The process, according to the volunteer coordinator takes about 1-3 months. If I pass the interview, then I get to volunter at the trauma center.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[HCHopeful]

I think doing the phlebotomy gig sounds like the better option. It is closer to where you'll be, and it would provide direct patient interaction, which is huge.

 

[Major]

Do the phlebotomy. You get patient interaction and earn some walking money. Kill two birds with one stone. Then you can volunteer at a hospice, nursing home, big brother/sister, casa, etc. Those types will usually be more flexible with your schedule.

 

[Planes2Doc]

This is an interesting situation... On one hand, you can volunteer with likely a once a week commitment, though the commute is far. Or, you can do paid clinical work at a closer hospital. It's a real toss-up, though I'm leaning more towards the volunteering. If you end up doing the phlebotomy work, you'll still need to volunteer on top of it. You need to do whatever will have the least negative impact on your grades and MCAT. This is why volunteering is usually better...

Volunteering is usually better bang for your buck since it's a minimal commitment compared to working a job, yet it knocks out more requirements for the medical school admissions process.

If I were in your shoes, I'd see if you can find volunteer work at the hospital near you. That would be the best of both worlds.

 

[mvenus929]

Volunteering is usually better bang for your buck since it's a minimal commitment compared to working a job, yet it knocks out more requirements for the medical school admissions process.

I disagree. A clinical job carries far more weight than clinical volunteering for the simple reason that you can get involved more, and thus have a far better understanding of how things work in the hospital. And if you're working, it's seen as a bigger commitment, so you can get away with having less of something else on your application.

Also, you can learn a ton about lab tests that will serve you well as a physician by working as a phlebotomist. It's amazing how little physicians know about the tests they order (specifically about how to collect the specimens and what complications might arise from that).

 

[Planes2Doc]

I disagree. A clinical job carries far more weight than clinical volunteering for the simple reason that you can get involved more, and thus have a far better understanding of how things work in the hospital. And if you're working, it's seen as a bigger commitment, so you can get away with having less of something else on your application.

Solely based on getting into medical school, both volunteering and clinical work will get you in. I'm not arguing that you don't handle more responsibilities as an entry-level clinical worker, because you do. But ultimately, ADCOMs aren't looking for applicants to learn any specific skill sets. They want them to see the clinical environment, so they know what they are getting themselves into. If a pre-med takes an entry-level clinical job, and it ends up taking up too much time, thus causing the grades and MCAT to fall; that can end up destroying the applicant's chances of getting into medical school. The purpose of the pre-med process is to get into medical school, not to become a professional phlebotomist, scribe, EMT, CNA, etc... Pre-meds aspire to be physicians, not entry-level clinical workers. I've seen people bite off more than they can chew, and they are in bad positions now in their lives. You only hear the good on SDN, never the bad. Once someone fails the pre-med process, I doubt they will continue posting on this site.

And this brings me to my next point...

Also, you can learn a ton about lab tests that will serve you well as a physician by working as a phlebotomist. It's amazing how little physicians know about the tests they order (specifically about how to collect the specimens and what complications might arise from that).

Medical school starts you at square one. I understand that you might gain a nice understanding of things working an entry-level clinical job, but technically medical schools don't require this to be successful. If you pay attention in your pre-clinical classes and strive to actually learn the information, then you will know what those lab tests mean. But then again, I'm not a resident yet... So I'll have to wait and see what you're talking about.

 

[mvenus929]

Solely based on getting into medical school, both volunteering and clinical work will get you in. I'm not arguing that you don't handle more responsibilities as an entry-level clinical worker, because you do. But ultimately, ADCOMs aren't looking for applicants to learn any specific skill sets. They want them to see the clinical environment, so they know what they are getting themselves into.

This thread is specifically about phlebotomy vs. volunteering. I'd have the exact same advise if someone asked about becoming a scribe, EMT, or CNA. Clinical jobs get you more exposure and help you understand the process better than volunteering in the hospital, because you have additional responsibilities in that position. You actually do interact with patients in a clinical setting, and have to talk to nurses and physicians and other workers in the hospital. Having done both phlebotomy and hospital volunteering, my time as a phlebotomist taught me a whole lot more about how medicine works (and the different careers available in medicine) than my stint volunteering (and adcoms picked up on that).

Motivated people can get a lot out of volunteering in the hospital, but for the average volunteer--you're going to be frustrated if you go in expecting to see all that doctors and other workers do, because you're going to be limited in where you can go and how much you can interact with patients. If that is your only clinical experience, or your other clinical experience is shadowing a few times, you may not have enough experience to really articulate 'why medicine', which is what adcoms are looking for in the clinical experience portion. Which I believe is more important than whether or not you volunteered as well.

If a pre-med takes an entry-level clinical job, and it ends up taking up too much time, thus causing the grades and MCAT to fall; that can end up destroying the applicant's chances of getting into medical school. [...] I've seen people bite off more than they can chew, and they are in bad positions now in their lives.

This is a fair point, and should definitely be considered. But could also be said about just taking on too many other ECs.

Medical school starts you at square one. I understand that you might gain a nice understanding of things working an entry-level clinical job, but technically medical schools don't require this to be successful. If you pay attention in your pre-clinical classes and strive to actually learn the information, then you will know what those lab tests mean. But then again, I'm not a resident yet... So I'll have to wait and see what you're talking about.

You misunderstood my point. Yes, you will learn in med school how to interpret lab tests and when to order them. The things I'm referring to are less concrete--like knowing you have to stick a patient again if all you got the first time was a CBC and now you want a CMP. Or knowing that you can't add an ammonia to blood in lab, because it requires special treatment right after the draw. Or how blood cultures are different from other cultures. Or how much blood is required to run those 5 tests on the baby that is 3 lbs. Yeah, you can pick these things up over time, but it's nice to know them from day 1. And I'm not saying that everyone should become a phleb just to learn these things, just that it's a nice perk to doing the job. One that you wouldn't get by volunteering.

 

[Planes2Doc]

This thread is specifically about phlebotomy vs. volunteering. I'd have the exact same advise if someone asked about becoming a scribe, EMT, or CNA. Clinical jobs get you more exposure and help you understand the process better than volunteering in the hospital, because you have additional responsibilities in that position. You actually do interact with patients in a clinical setting, and have to talk to nurses and physicians and other workers in the hospital. Having done both phlebotomy and hospital volunteering, my time as a phlebotomist taught me a whole lot more about how medicine works (and the different careers available in medicine) than my stint volunteering (and adcoms picked up on that).

Motivated people can get a lot out of volunteering in the hospital, but for the average volunteer--you're going to be frustrated if you go in expecting to see all that doctors and other workers do, because you're going to be limited in where you can go and how much you can interact with patients. If that is your only clinical experience, or your other clinical experience is shadowing a few times, you may not have enough experience to really articulate 'why medicine', which is what adcoms are looking for in the clinical experience portion. Which I believe is more important than whether or not you volunteered as well.

This is a fair point, and should definitely be considered. But could also be said about just taking on too many other ECs.

You misunderstood my point. Yes, you will learn in med school how to interpret lab tests and when to order them. The things I'm referring to are less concrete--like knowing you have to stick a patient again if all you got the first time was a CBC and now you want a CMP. Or knowing that you can't add an ammonia to blood in lab, because it requires special treatment right after the draw. Or how blood cultures are different from other cultures. Or how much blood is required to run those 5 tests on the baby that is 3 lbs. Yeah, you can pick these things up over time, but it's nice to know them from day 1. And I'm not saying that everyone should become a phleb just to learn these things, just that it's a nice perk to doing the job. One that you wouldn't get by volunteering.

You bring up some great points. Thanks for taking the time to write up these insightful remarks. 🙂

But from the perspective of doing the minimal amount to gain admission, volunteering will be better simply because it kills two birds with one stone (clinical experience + volunteering boxes checked off), and it's usually a once a week commitment. You're right on target in regards to learning more doing clinical jobs. I can't argue with that, and I won't, because I completely agree with you 100%. So if the OP or any other person is trying to get meaningful things out of the process, I'd do what you recommend. If they are looking for the path of least resistance, it's volunteering, volunteering, and volunteering.

Usually when I'm making my arguments, I'm making them from a very extreme perspective. I look at the medical school admissions process as following the path of least resistance (same as what many pre-med advisers suggest), which people either strongly agree, or strongly disagree with me on. In this case, I think we can definitely agree to disagree.

 

[Beargryllz]

I did phlebotomy but I never took a course for it

If your choice is between getting paid for clinical experience and not getting paid for "clinical experience", the choice is really easy

 

[mvenus929]

Usually when I'm making my arguments, I'm making them from a very extreme perspective. I look at the medical school admissions process as following the path of least resistance (same as what many pre-med advisers suggest), which people either strongly agree, or strongly disagree with me on. In this case, I think we can definitely agree to disagree.

Yeah, I had to apply twice to get in to med school, so I go for more of a 'do it once and do it well' philosophy. So, agree to disagree 🙂