Construction and application of service quality evaluation system in the preclinical research on cardiovascular implant devices.

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak

Animal Experimental Center, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease & Center for cardiovascular experimental study and evaluation, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Beijing Key Laboratory of Pre-clinical Research and Evaluation for Cardiovascular Implant Materials, Beijing, 100037, China.

Published: February 2019

Background: Services for the preclinical development and evaluation of cardiovascular implant devices (CVIDs) is a new industry. However, there is still no indicator system for quality evaluation. Our aim is to construct a service for quality evaluation system for the preclinical research and development of CVIDs based on Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP).

Methods: First, we reviewed the related literature to identify and select possible factors. Second, we developed an analytic hierarchy process framework. Third, we developed a questionnaire based on pairwise comparisons and invited 10 experienced specialists to rate these factors. We then used FAHP to compute the weights of these factors and prioritize them. Finally, to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed indicator system, a case study was performed as a practical example.

Results: Four main indicators (professionalism, functionality, stability and security) and 15 subindicators were selected to form the service evaluation system based on literature review and expert's proposals. According to the weight calculation data, the order of primary indicators by importance, is professionalism (0.6457), security (0.1193), functionality (0.0958) and stability (0.0596) in sequence. Top five secondary indices are personnel's technical ability, facility and equipment attractiveness, data auditability, confidentiality capability and professional service procedures. In the case study, FW's final actual effectiveness value was 0.9076, which is the same as the actual situation.

Conclusion: The indicator system established in this study is comprehensive, reasonable, reliable and with strong practicality. It is worth popularizing and applying. The implementation of this evaluation system can provide measurable evidence for service demander and a way to improve service quality for suppliers.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6396521PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0773-4DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

evaluation system
16
service quality
12
quality evaluation
12
indicator system
12
system preclinical
8
cardiovascular implant
8
implant devices
8
preclinical development
8
hierarchy process
8
case study
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!