Ana Flávia A Dos Santos, Lucas A Dos Santos, Talita D C Frazão, Amanda G de Assis, Maiko S C de Oliveira, João F da Costa Júnior, Patrícia Angélica T da S Ferro, Ricardo P de Souza
{"title":"在重症监护中优先设置:对获得重症监护病房床位进行排序的多标准方法。","authors":"Ana Flávia A Dos Santos, Lucas A Dos Santos, Talita D C Frazão, Amanda G de Assis, Maiko S C de Oliveira, João F da Costa Júnior, Patrícia Angélica T da S Ferro, Ricardo P de Souza","doi":"10.1186/s12913-025-12647-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a situation in public health services where there is a high demand for services but not enough capacity to meet that demand. Within the critical care landscape in Brazil, there exists a significant disparity: of the total of 45,848 beds in intensive care units, only 49% are accessible to the Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS), while the remaining 51% are exclusively allocated to a mere 23% of the population. Therefore, multicriteria decision analysis has the potential to be utilized as a tool in the decision-making process since it has been stated as a tool that promotes transparency and brings rationality to the decision-making process. The objective of this study was to create a multi-criteria model that can assist in the allocation of beds in Adult Intensive Care Units in the state of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A twelve-step framework was used to carry out the decision-aiding process. The PROMETHEE I and II methods were employed to build the multicriteria model. Three stages were followed: problem structuring, preference modeling and aggregation, and finalization. The decision problem was approached from the perspective of the P.γ ranking problem in which six clinical vignettes based on actual patients were ranked in order of preference, defined by the decision-maker's preference system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two pre-orders were recommended: a partial one, in which four pairs of actions were incomparable with each other; and a complete one, in which relationships between each pair of alternatives were described. The sensitivity analysis revealed considerable robustness of the model because of the range of the stability interval.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The partial ranking proposed by PROMETHEE I showed that Patient 6 outranks all the patients within the set of alternatives. When the complete ranking was generated, aided by PROMETHEE II, Patient 6 remained as the alternative that outranks all the others. Therefore, considering the resource-constrained scenario, Patient 6 was recommended to be admitted. The proposed model formalized the decision-making process of prioritizing access to Adult Intensive Care Unit beds, ensuring transparency and rationality by structuring all relevant factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"1294"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Priority setting in critical care: a multicriteria approach to ranking access to Intensive Care Unit beds.\",\"authors\":\"Ana Flávia A Dos Santos, Lucas A Dos Santos, Talita D C Frazão, Amanda G de Assis, Maiko S C de Oliveira, João F da Costa Júnior, Patrícia Angélica T da S Ferro, Ricardo P de Souza\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12913-025-12647-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a situation in public health services where there is a high demand for services but not enough capacity to meet that demand. Within the critical care landscape in Brazil, there exists a significant disparity: of the total of 45,848 beds in intensive care units, only 49% are accessible to the Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS), while the remaining 51% are exclusively allocated to a mere 23% of the population. Therefore, multicriteria decision analysis has the potential to be utilized as a tool in the decision-making process since it has been stated as a tool that promotes transparency and brings rationality to the decision-making process. The objective of this study was to create a multi-criteria model that can assist in the allocation of beds in Adult Intensive Care Units in the state of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A twelve-step framework was used to carry out the decision-aiding process. The PROMETHEE I and II methods were employed to build the multicriteria model. Three stages were followed: problem structuring, preference modeling and aggregation, and finalization. The decision problem was approached from the perspective of the P.γ ranking problem in which six clinical vignettes based on actual patients were ranked in order of preference, defined by the decision-maker's preference system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two pre-orders were recommended: a partial one, in which four pairs of actions were incomparable with each other; and a complete one, in which relationships between each pair of alternatives were described. The sensitivity analysis revealed considerable robustness of the model because of the range of the stability interval.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The partial ranking proposed by PROMETHEE I showed that Patient 6 outranks all the patients within the set of alternatives. When the complete ranking was generated, aided by PROMETHEE II, Patient 6 remained as the alternative that outranks all the others. Therefore, considering the resource-constrained scenario, Patient 6 was recommended to be admitted. The proposed model formalized the decision-making process of prioritizing access to Adult Intensive Care Unit beds, ensuring transparency and rationality by structuring all relevant factors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9012,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Health Services Research\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"1294\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Health Services Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-12647-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-12647-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:公共卫生服务存在一种情况,即对服务的需求很高,但没有足够的能力来满足这种需求。在巴西的重症监护领域,存在着显著的差距:在重症监护病房的45,848张床位中,只有49%可以进入统一卫生系统(Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS),而其余51%仅分配给23%的人口。因此,多标准决策分析有可能被用作决策过程中的工具,因为它被认为是一种促进透明度和为决策过程带来合理性的工具。本研究的目的是创建一个多标准模型,以帮助巴西北部大德州的成人重症监护病房的床位分配。方法:采用12步框架进行决策辅助过程。采用PROMETHEE I和PROMETHEE II方法建立多准则模型。研究分为三个阶段:问题构建、偏好建模和聚合、最终确定。决策问题从P.γ排序问题的角度来解决,其中基于实际患者的六个临床小插曲按偏好顺序排序,由决策者的偏好系统定义。结果:推荐了两个预购:一个是部分预购,其中四对动作彼此不可比较;一个是完整的,其中描述了每对选择之间的关系。灵敏度分析表明,由于稳定区间的范围,模型具有相当的鲁棒性。结论:PROMETHEE I提出的部分排序显示,患者6在备选组内的排名高于所有患者。在PROMETHEE II的帮助下,当完整的排名生成时,患者6仍然是排名高于所有其他患者的替代方案。因此,考虑到资源紧张的情况,建议患者6住院。所提出的模型形式化了优先使用成人重症监护病房床位的决策过程,通过构建所有相关因素来确保透明度和合理性。
Priority setting in critical care: a multicriteria approach to ranking access to Intensive Care Unit beds.
Background: There is a situation in public health services where there is a high demand for services but not enough capacity to meet that demand. Within the critical care landscape in Brazil, there exists a significant disparity: of the total of 45,848 beds in intensive care units, only 49% are accessible to the Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS), while the remaining 51% are exclusively allocated to a mere 23% of the population. Therefore, multicriteria decision analysis has the potential to be utilized as a tool in the decision-making process since it has been stated as a tool that promotes transparency and brings rationality to the decision-making process. The objective of this study was to create a multi-criteria model that can assist in the allocation of beds in Adult Intensive Care Units in the state of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil.
Methods: A twelve-step framework was used to carry out the decision-aiding process. The PROMETHEE I and II methods were employed to build the multicriteria model. Three stages were followed: problem structuring, preference modeling and aggregation, and finalization. The decision problem was approached from the perspective of the P.γ ranking problem in which six clinical vignettes based on actual patients were ranked in order of preference, defined by the decision-maker's preference system.
Results: Two pre-orders were recommended: a partial one, in which four pairs of actions were incomparable with each other; and a complete one, in which relationships between each pair of alternatives were described. The sensitivity analysis revealed considerable robustness of the model because of the range of the stability interval.
Conclusion: The partial ranking proposed by PROMETHEE I showed that Patient 6 outranks all the patients within the set of alternatives. When the complete ranking was generated, aided by PROMETHEE II, Patient 6 remained as the alternative that outranks all the others. Therefore, considering the resource-constrained scenario, Patient 6 was recommended to be admitted. The proposed model formalized the decision-making process of prioritizing access to Adult Intensive Care Unit beds, ensuring transparency and rationality by structuring all relevant factors.
期刊介绍:
BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.