Articlegold2013

User needs elicitation via analytic hierarchy process (AHP). A case study on a Computed Tomography (CT) scanner

Leandro Pecchia · Jennifer L Martin · Angela Ragozzino · Carmela Vanzanella · Arturo Scognamiglio · Luciano Mirarchi +1 more

99 citations0/0 files storedBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Multi-Criteria Decision Making Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life Quality and Safety in Healthcare

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The rigorous elicitation of user needs is a crucial step for both medical device design and purchasing. However, user needs elicitation is often based on qualitative methods whose findings can be difficult to integrate into medical decision-making. This paper describes the application of AHP to elicit user needs for a new CT scanner for use in a public hospital. METHODS: AHP was used to design a hierarchy of 12 needs for a new CT scanner, grouped into 4 homogenous categories, and to prepare a paper questionnaire to investigate the relative priorities of these. The questionnaire was completed by 5 senior clinicians working in a variety of clinical specialisations and departments in the same Italian public hospital. RESULTS: Although safety and performance were considered the most important issues, user needs changed according to clinical scenario. For elective surgery, the five most important needs were: spatial resolution, processing software, radiation dose, patient monitoring, and contrast medium. For emergency, the top five most important needs were: patient monitoring, radiation dose, contrast medium control, speed run, spatial resolution. CONCLUSIONS: AHP effectively supported user need elicitation, helping to develop an analytic and intelligible framework of decision-making. User needs varied according to working scenario (elective versus emergency medicine) more than clinical specialization. This method should be considered by practitioners involved in decisions about new medical technology, whether that be during device design or before deciding whether to allocate budgets for new medical devices according to clinical functions or according to hospital department.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 99 citations exist upstream.

References

1977A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures 2000Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data 2001Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines 2012Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process 2010Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature 2001Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process 2007The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: A literature review 1997On the measurement of preferences in the analytic hierarchy process

Cited by

2020Evaluation of hospital disaster preparedness by a multi-criteria decision making approach: The case of Turkish hospitals 2019Health technology assessment (HTA) of optoelectronic biosensors for oncology by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Likert scale 2014MULTICRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS: A MULTIFACETED APPROACH TO MEDICAL EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT 2013The Primitive Cognitive Network Process in healthcare and medical decision making: Comparisons with the Analytic Hierarchy Process

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.