All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

Comparison of methods of value engineering and multi-criteria evaluation ? applied to vital signs monitors

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F68407700%3A21460%2F14%3A00218008" target="_blank" >RIV/68407700:21460/14:00218008 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Result on the web

    <a href="http://www.htai2014.org/temp/201452638552/HTAI_AbstractVolume_web1.pdf" target="_blank" >http://www.htai2014.org/temp/201452638552/HTAI_AbstractVolume_web1.pdf</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    Comparison of methods of value engineering and multi-criteria evaluation ? applied to vital signs monitors

  • Original language description

    Background: Utilization of QALYs in outcome assessment is irrelevant in some kinds of medical devices, such as vital signs monitors. Multi-criteria evaluation and value engineering seem to be reasonable alternatives in apparatus assessment. Objectives: Within this study, both methods of value engineering and those of multi-criteria decision making are compared. The study was focused on vital signs monitors purchase for a department of anesthesiology and resuscitation. Clinical and user´s data were takenfrom several units of anesthesiology and resuscitation. Technical data were supplied from a thorough market analysis. Methods: Out of value engineering methods, the pair-wise comparison method and Saaty´s method were studied. In the case of multi-criteria decision making, the TOPSIS method, the ideal point method, and the weighted sum method were analyzed. Individual variants were subsequently combined with each other. A statistical comparison of the resulting data and a sensitivity ana

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    O - Miscellaneous

  • CEP classification

    FS - Medical facilities, apparatus and equipment

  • OECD FORD branch

Result continuities

  • Project

    <a href="/en/project/NT11532" target="_blank" >NT11532: Medical Technology Assessment</a><br>

  • Continuities

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Others

  • Publication year

    2014

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů