Search results

Hospital evaluations create competition between healthcare providers. In this study, a multi criteria decision-making (MCDM) method is used to evaluate criteria that affect hospital service quality. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Criteria affecting hospital service quality are identified. Four Iranian public hospitals are evaluated using these criteria. Four hybrid methods, including modified digital logic–technique for order of preference by similarity to an ideal solution, analytical hierarchy process–technique for order of preference by similarity to an ideal solution, analytical hierarchy process–elimination and choice expressing reality and modified digital logic–elimination and choice expressing reality are used to evaluate hospital service quality. Results are aggregated using the Copeland method and final ranks are determined.

The four main criteria for evaluating hospital service quality are: environment; responsiveness; equipment and facilities; and professional capability. Results suggest that professional capability is the most important criterion. The Copeland method, used to integrate four MCDM hybrid methods, provides the final hospital ranks.

The criteria the authors identified and their weight help hospital managers to achieve comprehensive organizational growth and more efficient resource usage. Moreover, the decision matrix helps managers to identify their strengths and weaknesses.

New and comprehensive criteria are proposed for hospital quality assessments. Moreover, a new hybrid MCDM approach is used to achieve final hospital rankings.

Hospital structures serve to protect and improve public health; however, they are recognized as a major source of environmental degradation. Thus, an effective performance evaluation framework is required to improve hospital sustainability. In this context, this study presents a holistic methodology that integrates the sustainability balanced scorecard (SBSC) with fuzzy Delphi method and fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approaches for evaluating the sustainability performance of hospitals.

Initially, a comprehensive list of relevant sustainability evaluation criteria was considered based on six SBSC-based dimensions, in line with triple-bottom-line sustainability dimensions, and derived from the literature review and experts’ opinions. Then, the weights of perspectives and their respective criteria are computed and ranked utilizing the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Subsequently, the hospitals’ sustainable performance values are ranked based on these criteria using the Fuzzy Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution.

A numerical application was conducted in six public hospitals to exhibit the proposed model’s applicability. The results of this study revealed that “Patient satisfaction,” “Efficiency,” “Effectiveness,” “Access to care” and “Waste production,” respectively, are the five most important criteria of sustainable performance.

The new model will provide decision-makers with management tools that may help them identify the relevant factors for upgrading the level of sustainability in their hospitals and thus improve public health and community well-being.

This is the first study that proposes a new hybrid decision-making methodology for evaluating and comparing hospitals’ sustainability performance under a fuzzy environment.