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

Kód výsledku v 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>

Výsledek na webu

<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

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

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

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

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

Název v anglickém jazyce

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

Popis výsledku anglicky

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

Druh

O - Ostatní výsledky

CEP obor

FS - Lékařská zařízení, přístroje a vybavení

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/NT11532" target="_blank" >NT11532: Hodnocení zdravotnických prostředků</a><br>

Návaznosti

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

Rok uplatnění

2014

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

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