Application of analytic hierarchy process for measuring and comparing the global performance of intensive care units

被引:29
作者
Hariharan, S [1 ]
Dey, PK
Chen, DR
Moseley, HSL
Kumar, AY
机构
[1] Univ W Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad Tobago
[2] Aston Univ, Aston Business Sch, Birmingham B4 7ET, W Midlands, England
[3] Univ W Indies, Sch Clin Med & Res, Bridgetown, Barbados
关键词
analytic hierarchy process; global performance; intensive care unit;
D O I
10.1016/j.jcrc.2005.04.002
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Purpose: To develop a model for the global performance measurement of intensive care units (ICUs) and to apply that model to compare the services for quality improvement. Materials and Methods: Analytic hierarchy process, a multiple-attribute decision-making technique, is used in this study to evolve such a model. The steps consisted of identifying the critical success factors for the best performance of an ICU, identifying subfactors that influence the critical factors, comparing them pairwise, deriving their relative importance and ratings, and calculating the cumulative performance according to the attributes of a given ICU. Every step in the model was derived by group discussions, brainstorming, and consensus among intensivists. Results: The model was applied to 3 ICUs, I each in Barbados, Trinidad, and India in tertiary care teaching hospitals of similar setting. The cumulative performance rating of the Barbados ICU was 1.17 when compared with that of Trinidad and Indian ICU, which were 0.82 and 0.75, respectively, showing that the Trinidad and Indian ICUs performed 70% and 64% with respect to Barbados ICU. The model also enabled identifying specific areas where the ICUs did not perform well, which helped to improvise those areas. Conclusions: Analytic hierarchy process is a very useful model to measure the global performance of an ICU. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:117 / 124
页数:8
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   ICU scoring systems allow prediction of patient outcomes and comparison of ICU performance [J].
Becker, RB ;
Zimmerman, JE .
CRITICAL CARE CLINICS, 1996, 12 (03) :503-&
[2]   Qualitative review of intensive care unit quality indicators [J].
Berenholtz, SM ;
Dorman, T ;
Ngo, K ;
Pronovost, PJ .
JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, 2002, 17 (01) :1-12
[3]   Quality of health care .2. Measuring quality of care [J].
Brook, RH ;
McGlynn, EA ;
Cleary, PD .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1996, 335 (13) :966-970
[4]   Analysis of three decision-making methods: A Breast cancer patient as a model [J].
Carter, KJ ;
Ritchey, NP ;
Castro, F ;
Caccamo, LP ;
Kessler, E ;
Erickson, BA .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1999, 19 (01) :49-57
[5]  
Dlugacz Yosef D, 2002, Jt Comm J Qual Improv, V28, P419
[6]   THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS IN MEDICAL DECISION-MAKING - A TUTORIAL [J].
DOLAN, JG ;
ISSELHARDT, BJ ;
CAPPUCCIO, JD .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1989, 9 (01) :40-50
[7]   Randomized controlled trial of a patient decision aid for colorectal cancer screening [J].
Dolan, JG ;
Frisina, S .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2002, 22 (02) :125-139
[8]   THE QUALITY OF CARE - HOW CAN IT BE ASSESSED [J].
DONABEDIAN, A .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1988, 260 (12) :1743-1748
[9]   GROUP DECISION SUPPORT WITH THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS [J].
DYER, RF ;
FORMAN, EH .
DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 1992, 8 (02) :99-124
[10]   Measuring the performance of neonatal care units in Scotland [J].
Field, K ;
Emrouznejad, A .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SYSTEMS, 2003, 27 (04) :315-324