IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aib/ibtjbs/v11y2015i2p165-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prioritization Of Quality Care Criteria To Deliver Quality Service Using Dematel

Author

Listed:
  • Raja Rub Nawaz

    (PAF-KIET Karachi)

  • Dr.Rafique Ahmed

    (Bahria, University Karachi)

  • Sajida Reza

    (BUITEMS, Quetta)

Abstract

PurposeHospitals are very vital as an element in Quality Care delivery and their evaluation in these terms on perpetual basis are much needed as these organizations contribute in improving health outcomes for general people.Hospitals, especially privately owned, are also run like businesses these days to remain competitive in the respective arena.The environment and situation faced by many hospitals are often complicated and which definitely requires insightful solutions to steer the direction of these businesses.This study was focused on the application of group decisionmaking tool, DEMATEL as one of the valid methods in MultiCriteria Decision Making MCDM.Methodology The study was exploratory in nature and efforts were made to justify by highlighting the criteria prioritization procedure to be undertaken by any healthcare organization.A slight deviation from standard foursteps of DEMATEL, a course of action was created in shape of eightstep procedure to exhibit a practical approach rather than mathematical theory approach.In order to make it more empirical in nature, a fivestage research framework was also devised and acted upon with the help of three separate questionnaires.Avedis Donabedian’s 1988 Quality Care framework was followed and multiple variables were devised, importance ratings were collected from patients on these devised variables and after reduction of variables in to manageable latent factors, called criteria in the study, DEMATEL method was applied to depict the prioritization of Quality Care criteria for the delivery of quality service via digraph.FindingsThe graphical representation through digraph showed that criteria were vertically divided in two halves as C1, C5, and C4 are shown as criteria influencing the lower half criteria C3, C6, and C2.The horizontal span of digraph reflected the importance of criteria prioritized and showed C1 criterion as the most important and C2 criterion with least importance.ImplicationsThe prioritization of the criteria along with their cause and effect distribution gave an insight into the constitution framework of localized healthcare services of Karachi, Pakistan

Suggested Citation

  • Raja Rub Nawaz & Dr.Rafique Ahmed & Sajida Reza, 2015. "Prioritization Of Quality Care Criteria To Deliver Quality Service Using Dematel," IBT Journal of Business Studies (JBS), Ilma University, Faculty of Management Science, vol. 11(2), pages 165-181.
    • Handle: RePEc:aib:ibtjbs:v:11:y:2015:i:2:p:165-181
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.46745/ilma.ibtjbs.2015.112.13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ibtjbs.ilmauniversity.edu.pk/journal/jbs/11.2/13.%20Prioritization%20of%20Quality%20Care%20Criteria%20to%20Deliver%20Quality%20Service%20Using%20Dematel.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.46745/ilma.ibtjbs.2015.112.13?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liou, James J.H. & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Chang, Han-Chun, 2007. "Airline safety measurement using a hybrid model," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 243-249.
    2. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Raja Rub Nawaz & Dr. Rafique Ahmed & Sajida Reza, 2015. "Prioritization Of Quality Care Criteria To Deliver Quality Service Using Dematel," IBT Journal of Business Studies (JBS), Ilma University, Faculty of Management Science, vol. 11(2), pages 11-13.
    2. Alsyouf, Imad, 2009. "Maintenance practices in Swedish industries: Survey results," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 212-223, September.
    3. Krejci, Igor & Voriskova, Andrea, 2010. "Analysis of the Method for the Selection of Regions with Concentrated State Aid," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 2(3), pages 1-8, September.
    4. Kokaraki, Nikoleta & Hopfe, Christina J. & Robinson, Elaine & Nikolaidou, Elli, 2019. "Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 991-1007.
    5. Pires, Ana & Chang, Ni-Bin & Martinho, Graça, 2011. "An AHP-based fuzzy interval TOPSIS assessment for sustainable expansion of the solid waste management system in Setúbal Peninsula, Portugal," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 7-21.
    6. Mulliner, Emma & Smallbone, Kieran & Maliene, Vida, 2013. "An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-279.
    7. Akshay Hinduja & Manju Pandey, 2023. "Analysis and Comparison of State-of-the-Art Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-making Methods Under Different Levels of Uncertainty," Vision, , vol. 27(1), pages 93-109, February.
    8. Yildirim, Ercan & AR, Ilker Murat & Dabić, Marina & Baki, Birdogan & Peker, Iskender, 2022. "A multi-stage decision making model for determining a suitable innovation structure using an open innovation approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 379-391.
    9. Manel Baucells & Rakesh K. Sarin, 2003. "Group Decisions with Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1105-1118, August.
    10. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Higgins, Andrew, 2008. "A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 255-265, January.
    11. Dong-Shang Chang & Sheng-Hung Chen & Chia-Wei Hsu & Allen H. Hu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2015. "Evaluation Framework for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: Sustainable Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-25, August.
    12. MacLean, Leonard & Richman, Alex & MacLean, Stuart, 2016. "Benchmarking airports with specific safety performance measures," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 349-364.
    13. Jui-Kuei Chen & I-Shuo Chen, 2012. "An Inno-Qual performance system for higher education," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 1119-1149, December.
    14. Yu-Sheng Kao & Kazumitsu Nawata & Chi-Yo Huang, 2019. "An Exploration and Confirmation of the Factors Influencing Adoption of IoT-Based Wearable Fitness Trackers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-31, September.
    15. Eduardo Fernandez & Jorge Navarro & Rafael Olmedo, 2018. "Characterization of the Effectiveness of Several Outranking-Based Multi-Criteria Sorting Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1047-1084, July.
    16. Dong, Yucheng & Liu, Yating & Liang, Haiming & Chiclana, Francisco & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique, 2018. "Strategic weight manipulation in multiple attribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 154-164.
    17. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    18. Hatami-Marbini, Adel & Tavana, Madjid, 2011. "An extension of the Electre I method for group decision-making under a fuzzy environment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 373-386, August.
    19. Wang, Tsung-Cheng, 2012. "The interactive trade decision-making research: An application case of novel hybrid MCDM model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 926-935.
    20. Walczak, Dariusz & Rutkowska, Aleksandra, 2017. "Project rankings for participatory budget based on the fuzzy TOPSIS method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(2), pages 706-714.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aib:ibtjbs:v:11:y:2015:i:2:p:165-181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Syed Kashif Rafi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmilmpk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.