Evaluating and prioritizing the healthcare waste disposal center locations using a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method.

Healthcare waste disposal center location (HCWDCL) impacts the environment and the health of living beings. Different and sometimes contradictory criteria in determining the appropriate site location for disposing of healthcare waste (HCW) complicate the decision-making process. This research presents a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method, named PROMSIS, to determine the appropriate HCWDCL in a real case. The PROMSIS is the combination of two well-known MCDM methods, namely TOPSIS and PROMETHEE. Moreover, fuzzy theory is used to describe the uncertainties of the problem parameters. To provide a reliable decision on selecting the best HCWDCL, a comprehensive list of criteria is identified through a literature review and experts' opinions obtained from the case study. In total, 40 criteria are identified and classified into five major criteria, namely economic, environmental, social, technical, and geological. The weight of the considered criteria is determined by the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. Then, the score of the alternative HCWDCLs in each considered criterion is obtained. Finally, the candidate locations for disposing of HCWs are ranked by the proposed fuzzy PROMSIS method. The results show that the most important criteria in ranking the alternatives in the studied case are economic, environmental, and social, respectively. Moreover, the sub-criteria of operating cost, transportation cost, and pollution are identified as the most important sub-criteria, respectively.

Evaluating and prioritizing hospital service quality.

PURPOSE: 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. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: 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. FINDINGS: 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. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: 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. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: New and comprehensive criteria are proposed for hospital quality assessments. Moreover, a new hybrid MCDM approach is used to achieve final hospital rankings.