Modelo de Decisiones Multi–criterio para Evaluar el Soporte de la Tecnología de Información en un Servicio de Salud Utilizando el Proceso Analítico Jerárquico
Astrid Oddershede Herreraª, Rolando Carrasco González b and Esperanza Barham Abu–Muhorc
ª Industrial Engineering Department, University of Santiago of Chile, Chile. Av. Ecuador 3769 Casilla 10233. Santiago, Chile e–mail: aoddersh@usach.cl
b School of Electrical, Electronic & Computer Engineering, Newcastle University .UK. Merz Court, Newcastle–upon–Tyne, NE17RU e–mail: r.carrasco@ncl.ac.uk
c School of Medicine, Medical Sciences Faculty, University of Santiago of Chile, Chile Av. Ecuador 3766 Santiago, Chile e–mail: ebarham@usach.cl
]]> Article received on March 06, 2008
Abstract
This paper presents a multi–criteria decision making (MCDM) model for evaluating an Information and Communication Technology (ICT) network system in health care .The competing goals existing in Health Institutions need a special treatment, thus the MCDM approach is essential for identifying ICT network quality of service (QoS) requirements and implications. A pilot study based on user perception is explored involving three categories of hospitals in Chile. Data is collected considering various health sector representatives. The main contribution is the proposed decision methodology to develop criteria for evaluating QoS issues of an ICT network system within a healthcare environment using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). The results provides a framework to make decisions concerning an information technology networked system, characterizing end users and their needs and enabling tradeoffs in agreement with the institution objectives.
Keywords: AHP, Health service decision support, ICT, MCDM
Resumen
Esta publicación presenta un modelo multicriterio de toma de decisiones (MCDM) para evaluar un sistema de información y tecnología de comunicación (TIC) en un servicio de salud. Los objetivos, conflictivos entre si, existentes en instituciones de salud, necesitan un trato especial. El enfoque de MCDM es esencial para identificar requisitos y trascendencia de la calidad de servicio (QoS) en un sistema de TIC. Un estudio empírico basado en la opinión del usuario involucrando tres categorías de hospitales en Chile se lleva a cabo, considerando datos de varios representantes del sector de la salud. La contribución principal es la metodología propuesta para desarrollar criterios para valorar aplicaciones de QoS en una red de TIC de un servicio de salud a través del Proceso de Jerárquico Analítico (PJA). Los resultados proporcionan un marco para tomar decisiones referentes a un sistema de tecnología de la información, caracterizando usuarios, sus necesidades y permitiendo compensaciones de común acuerdo con los objetivos de la institución.
Palabras Claves: AHP, PJA, Decisiones multicriterio, TIC en servicio de salud.
]]>DESCARGAR ARTÍCULO EN FORMATO PDF
References
1. Alexander, H.R., Biggers, J. Forman, E, and Schleicher, D. "Prioritization of Civil Tiltrotor Technologies Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process", Paper presented at the Third International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, George Washington University, Washington DC, 1990. [ Links ]
2. Ammenwertha, Elske, Gräberb Stefan, Herrmann, Gabriele, Bürkled Thomas, Königb, Jochem, "Evaluation of health information systems–problems and challenges ", International Journal of Medical Informatics 71, 125–135 (2003). [ Links ]
3. Bailey, C., and T. Pang. ."Health Information for all by 2015?" The Lancet. Vol 364, issue 943: 223–24 (2004). [ Links ]
4. 4Bourret, Christian, "Data Concerns and Challenges in Health: Networks, Information Systems and Electronic Records," Data Science Journal, Volume 3, 17 September (2004) [ Links ]
5. Chang–Kyo Suh, Eui–Ho Suh and Kwang–Churn Baek "Prioritizing Telecommunication for Long Range R & D Planning", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 41, N°. 3, (1994). [ Links ]
6. Dick RS, Steen EB, and Detmer, D.E Revised Edition.. The Computer–Based Patient Record: An Essential Technology For Health Care. , Washington DC: National Academy Press, (1997). ISBN–13978–0–309–08684–4. [ Links ]
7. GAO, Feng, YE, Xinfeng, "A Hierarchical Trade–off Assessment Model and the Systematic Evaluation of Networked Systems", New Zealand, Fast Abstract ISSRE, Copyright , Chillarege Press, (2002) [ Links ]
8. Huang, Wayne W. Wang, Yingluo, & Day, John. Eds. "Global Mobile Commerce, Strategies, Implementation, and Case Studies." Published in USA and UK, by Information Science Reference.ISBN–13: 978–1–59904–558–0, 2008. [ Links ]
9. ISO/IEC: "ISO/IEC 9126–1: Information Technology – Software quality characteristics and metrics –Part 1: Quality characteristics and sub–characteristics (1997) [ Links ]
10. National Research Council. Networking Health: Prescriptions for the Internet. National Academic Press ISBN–10: 0–309–06843–6, (2000). [ Links ]
11. Oddershede, A.M., Arias, A.E. "A Rural Development Decision Support Using Analytic Hierarchy Process". Journal of Computer Modeling,. Elsevier. Vol. 46.Issue 7–8. 1107–1114. ISSN: 0895–7177. October 2007 [ Links ]
12. Oddershede, A.M., Carrasco, R.A., Soto, I. "Decision Model for Information and Communications Technology Implications in Health Service: User Perception" SMDM 27th Annual Meeting, Society for Medical Decision Making Conference, San Francisco, California, USA, October, 2005. [ Links ]
13. Oddershede, A.M., Carrasco, R.A. "Analytic Hierarchy Process Decision Model For Health Institution Selection". Paper presented at the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (Informs) Annual meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, November 2006 [ Links ]
14. Oddershede, A.M., Carrasco , R.A. "Information and Communications Technology Significance in Health Care: User Perception," Mediterranean Journal of Electronics and Communications. Vol. 2. N°2, Pages. 82–89 (2006) [ Links ]
15. Saaty, Thomas L. Decision Making for Leaders. Vol. II, AHP Series 315 pp., RWS Publ., (new ed.). ISBN 0–9620317, 2001 [ Links ]
16. Saaty, T. L, Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process, Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, RWS Pbl., ISBN 0–9620317–2–0, 1990. [ Links ] ]]>