Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

YENİ BİR HİBRİT YÖNTEM KULLANARAK RİSK DEĞERLENDİRMESİ: BİYOKİMYA BÖLÜMÜNDE BİR VAKA ÇALIŞMASI

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 3, 571 - 588, 29.09.2021

Öz

Son yıllarda sağlık hizmetlerinde risk yönetimi çok ilgi görmektedir. Sağlık sistemleri, ölümcül kazalar nedeniyle risk değerlendirmesi ile uğraşmak zorunda kalmaktadır. Biyokimya bölümü iş kazalarının önleyici olarak kontrol edilmesi gereken en kritik birimlerden biridir. Bu nedenle, bu makale iş kazalarını en aza indirmek için bir risk değerlendirme süreci geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Türkiye'deki bir hastanenin biyokimya bölümünde, literatürde tartışılan ve bu çalışma sırasında keşfedilen risk faktörlerini değerlendirmek için en etkili kantitatif risk analizi yöntemlerinden Hata Türü ve Etkileri Analizi (HTEA) ve 5x5 matris (L Matrix) uygulanmıştır. Öncelikle, karar vericilerin kazaların geçmiş verilerine dayalı risk değerlendirmesi risk yönetim sürecine uyarlanmıştır. Daha sonra olasılık, şiddet ve tespit edilebilirlik gibi risk faktörleri puanlanarak risk öncelik sayısı (RÖS) ve risk sınıfları elde edilmiştir ve yüksek risk sınıfları için önleyici tedbirler belirlenmiştir. Bu risk faktörlerini azaltmak veya ortadan kaldırmak amacıyla alınması gereken önlemlerin önceliklendirilmesi için Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) yöntemi uygulanmıştır. AHP yönteminden elde edilen sonuçlar dikkate alınarak risk önleme maliyetlerini en aza indirmek amacı ile bir hedef programlama modeli geliştirilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, önerilen yöntemlerin etkin olduğunu göstermektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Adar, E., Karatop, B., Bilgili, M. S., & İnce, M. (2020). Prioritization of the treatment and disposal methods of wastes containing polychlorinated biphenyl by fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making and risk assessment. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 192(7), 1-15.
  • Aguiar, D. C., Souza, H. J. C., & Salomon, V. A. (2010). AHP application to evaluate scoring criteria for Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA). International Journal of Analytic Hierarchy Process, 2, 3-13.
  • Altuntas, S., & Kansu, S. (2019). An innovative and integrated approach based on SERVQUAL, QFD and FMEA for service quality improvement: A case study. Kybernetes, 49(10), 2419-2453.
  • Bölükbaşı, N. (1999). Sağlık çalişanlarinda bel ve üst ekstremiteye ilişkin kas iskelet sistemi sorunları, sağlık çalışanlarının sağlığı. I. Ulusal Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı, ss.101-104, 26-28 Kasım, Ankara,
  • Carbone, T. A., & Tippett, D. D. (2004). Project risk management using the project risk FMEA. Engineering Management Journal, 16(4), 28-35.
  • Claxton, K., & Campbell-Allen, N. M. (2017). Failure modes effects analysis (FMEA) for review of a diagnostic genetic laboratory process. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 34(2), 265-277.
  • Dagsuyu, C., Derse, O., & Oturakci, M. (2021). Integrated risk prioritization and action selection for cold chain. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(13), 15646-15658.
  • Dağsuyu, C., Göçmen, E., Narlı, M., & Kokangül, A. (2016). Classical and fuzzy FMEA risk analysis in a sterilization unit. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 101, 286-294.
  • Derse, O., & Göçmen, E. (2021). Transportation mode choice using fault tree analysis and mathematical modeling approach. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security, 13(6), 642-660.
  • Fattahi, R., & Khalilzadeh, M. (2018). Risk evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on FMEA, extended MULTIMOORA, and AHP methods under fuzzy environment. Safety Science, 102, 290-300.
  • Hassan, A., Purnomo, M. R. A., & Anugerah, A. R. (2019). Fuzzy-analytical-hierarchy process in failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) to identify process failure in the warehouse of a cement industry. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 18(2), 78-388.
  • Hu, Y. P., You, X. Y., Wang, L., & Liu, H. C. (2019). An integrated approach for failure mode and effect analysis based on uncertain linguistic GRA–TOPSIS method. Soft Computing, 23(18), 8801-8814.
  • Huang, J., Xu, D. H., Liu, H. C., & Song, M. S. (2019). A new model for failure mode and effect analysis integrating linguistic Z-numbers and projection method. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 29(3), 530-538.
  • Ilbahar, E., Karaşan, A., Cebi, S., & Kahraman, C. (2018). A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Safety Science, 103, 124-136.
  • Jamshidi, A., Rahimi, S. A., Ait-Kadi, D., & Ruiz, A. (2015). A comprehensive fuzzy risk-based maintenance framework for prioritization of medical devices. Applied Soft Computing, 32, 322-334.
  • Kahraman, C., Kaya, İ., & Şenvar, Ö. (2013). Healthcare failure mode and effects analysis under fuzziness. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 19(2), 538-552.
  • Khasha, R., Sepehri, M. M., & Khatibi, T. (2013). A fuzzy FMEA approach to prioritizing surgical cancellation factors. International Journal of Hospital Research, 2(1), 17-24.
  • Kutlu, A. C., & Ekmekçioğlu, M. (2012). Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 61-67.
  • Lin, Q. L., Wang, D. J., Lin, W. G., & Liu, H. C. (2014). Human reliability assessment for medical devices based on failure mode and effects analysis and fuzzy linguistic theory. Safety Science, 62, 248-256.
  • Mangeli, M., Shahraki, A., & Saljooghi, F. H. (2019). Improvement of risk assessment in the FMEA using nonlinear model, revised fuzzy TOPSIS, and support vector machine. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 69, 209-216.
  • Mete, S. (2019). Assessing occupational risks in pipeline construction using FMEA-based AHP-MOORA integrated approach under Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 25(7), 1645-1660.
  • Mutlu, N. G., & Altuntas, S. (2019). Risk analysis for occupational safety and health in the textile industry: Integration of FMEA, FTA, and BIFPET methods. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 72, 222-240.
  • Negrichi, K., Di Mascolo, M., & Flaus, J. M. (2012). Risk analysis in sterilization services: A first step towards a generic model of risk. GISEH'2012-6ème conférence francophone en Gestion et Ingénierie des SystèmEs Hospitaliers, Canada.
  • Ocampo, L., Deiparine, C. B., & Go, A. L. (2020). Mapping Strategy to Best Practices for Sustainable Food Manufacturing Using Fuzzy DEMATEL-ANP-TOPSIS. Engineering Management Journal, 32(2), 130-150.
  • Özcan, E., & Kesiktaş, N. (2007). Mesleki kas iskelet hastalıklarından korunma ve ergonomi. İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Dergisi, 7(34): 6-9.
  • Özdener, N., Akbaba M., & Güler, C. (2004). Sağlık boyutuyla ergonomi hekim ve mühendisler için. Palme Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Özkaya, M. O., Yakın, V., & Ekinci, T. (2008). Stres düzeylerinin çalışanların iş doyumu üzerine etkisi Celal Bayar Üniversitesi çalışanları üzerine ampirik bir araştırma. Yönetim ve Ekonomi: Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), 163-179.
  • Özvarış, Ş. B. (1999). Sağlık çalışanlarının enfeksiyonlardan korunması. Sürekli Tıp Yayınları, Ankara.
  • Parlar, S. (2008). A problem that is not considering in health workers: Healthy work environment. TAF-Preventive Medicine Bulletin, 7(6), 547.
  • Reiling, J. G., Knutzen, B. L., & Stoecklein, M. (2003). FMEA-the cure for medical errors. Quality Progress, 36(8), 67-71.
  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw Hill International, New York. Sabuncu, N, K., Babadağ, G., Taşocak, T., Atabek, E, D., & Seçim, H. (2012). Hemşirelik esasları. Açıköğretim Fakültesi Yayınları, Eskişehir.
  • Soykan, Y., Kurnaz, N., & Kayık, M. (2014). Sağlik işletmelerinde hata türü ve etkileri analizi ile bulaşici hastalik risklerinin derecelendirilmesi. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 172-183.
  • Tayran, N., Talas, M. S. (2001) Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Cebeci Hastanesi’nde çalişan hemşirelerin çalişma koşullarindan kaynaklanan perkütan yaralanma durumlarinin incelenmesi. II. Ulusal Klinisyen Hemşire ve Ebeler Kongresi Kongre Kitabı, 21-25 Ekim 2001, Antalya. Trengonowati, D. L., Bahauddin, A., Ridwan, A., & Wulandari, Y. (2021). Proposed action of supply chain risk mitigation air compressor type L unloading ¼ HP using the Fuzzy–FMEA and Fuzzy–AHP method in PT XYZ. Journal of Innovation and Technology, 2(1), 10-17.
  • US Department of Defence, (1980). Procedures for performing a failure mode, effectsand criticality analysis. MIL-STD-1629, November, Washington.
  • Yılmaz, N., & Şenol, M. B. (2017). A fuzzy multi-criteria model for the occupational health and safety risk assessment process and its application. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 32(1), 77-87.
  • Wetterneck, T. B., Skibinski, K., Schroeder, M., Roberts, T. L., & Carayon, P. (2004). Challenges with the performance of failure mode and effects analysis in healthcare organizations: an iv medication administration HFMEA™. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, 48(15), 1708-1712.

RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 3, 571 - 588, 29.09.2021

Öz

Risk management has gained substantial attention for the health sector in recent years. Healthcare systems are forced to deal with risk assessment due to deadly accidents. Biochemistry department is one of the most critical units, in which occupational accidents should be controlled preventively. Thus, this paper aims at developing a risk assessment process to minimize the occupational accidents. Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and 5x5 matrix (L Matrix) as most effective quantitative risk analysis methods, are developed for a biochemistry department of a hospital in Turkey to evaluate the risk types discussed in related works and discovered during this work. First, the decision makers’ risk evaluation based on historical data of accidents are adopted to risk management process. Then, with regard to scoring of risk factors such as occurrence, severity and detectability, risk priority numbers and classes are obtained and preventive measures for the high-risk failure modes are determined. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method has been applied for prioritizing these measures to reduce or eliminate these risk types. Considering the results obtained from the AHP method, a goal programming model is developed to minimize the risk prevention costs. Obtained results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed methods.

Kaynakça

  • Adar, E., Karatop, B., Bilgili, M. S., & İnce, M. (2020). Prioritization of the treatment and disposal methods of wastes containing polychlorinated biphenyl by fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making and risk assessment. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 192(7), 1-15.
  • Aguiar, D. C., Souza, H. J. C., & Salomon, V. A. (2010). AHP application to evaluate scoring criteria for Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA). International Journal of Analytic Hierarchy Process, 2, 3-13.
  • Altuntas, S., & Kansu, S. (2019). An innovative and integrated approach based on SERVQUAL, QFD and FMEA for service quality improvement: A case study. Kybernetes, 49(10), 2419-2453.
  • Bölükbaşı, N. (1999). Sağlık çalişanlarinda bel ve üst ekstremiteye ilişkin kas iskelet sistemi sorunları, sağlık çalışanlarının sağlığı. I. Ulusal Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı, ss.101-104, 26-28 Kasım, Ankara,
  • Carbone, T. A., & Tippett, D. D. (2004). Project risk management using the project risk FMEA. Engineering Management Journal, 16(4), 28-35.
  • Claxton, K., & Campbell-Allen, N. M. (2017). Failure modes effects analysis (FMEA) for review of a diagnostic genetic laboratory process. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 34(2), 265-277.
  • Dagsuyu, C., Derse, O., & Oturakci, M. (2021). Integrated risk prioritization and action selection for cold chain. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(13), 15646-15658.
  • Dağsuyu, C., Göçmen, E., Narlı, M., & Kokangül, A. (2016). Classical and fuzzy FMEA risk analysis in a sterilization unit. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 101, 286-294.
  • Derse, O., & Göçmen, E. (2021). Transportation mode choice using fault tree analysis and mathematical modeling approach. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security, 13(6), 642-660.
  • Fattahi, R., & Khalilzadeh, M. (2018). Risk evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on FMEA, extended MULTIMOORA, and AHP methods under fuzzy environment. Safety Science, 102, 290-300.
  • Hassan, A., Purnomo, M. R. A., & Anugerah, A. R. (2019). Fuzzy-analytical-hierarchy process in failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) to identify process failure in the warehouse of a cement industry. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 18(2), 78-388.
  • Hu, Y. P., You, X. Y., Wang, L., & Liu, H. C. (2019). An integrated approach for failure mode and effect analysis based on uncertain linguistic GRA–TOPSIS method. Soft Computing, 23(18), 8801-8814.
  • Huang, J., Xu, D. H., Liu, H. C., & Song, M. S. (2019). A new model for failure mode and effect analysis integrating linguistic Z-numbers and projection method. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 29(3), 530-538.
  • Ilbahar, E., Karaşan, A., Cebi, S., & Kahraman, C. (2018). A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Safety Science, 103, 124-136.
  • Jamshidi, A., Rahimi, S. A., Ait-Kadi, D., & Ruiz, A. (2015). A comprehensive fuzzy risk-based maintenance framework for prioritization of medical devices. Applied Soft Computing, 32, 322-334.
  • Kahraman, C., Kaya, İ., & Şenvar, Ö. (2013). Healthcare failure mode and effects analysis under fuzziness. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 19(2), 538-552.
  • Khasha, R., Sepehri, M. M., & Khatibi, T. (2013). A fuzzy FMEA approach to prioritizing surgical cancellation factors. International Journal of Hospital Research, 2(1), 17-24.
  • Kutlu, A. C., & Ekmekçioğlu, M. (2012). Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 61-67.
  • Lin, Q. L., Wang, D. J., Lin, W. G., & Liu, H. C. (2014). Human reliability assessment for medical devices based on failure mode and effects analysis and fuzzy linguistic theory. Safety Science, 62, 248-256.
  • Mangeli, M., Shahraki, A., & Saljooghi, F. H. (2019). Improvement of risk assessment in the FMEA using nonlinear model, revised fuzzy TOPSIS, and support vector machine. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 69, 209-216.
  • Mete, S. (2019). Assessing occupational risks in pipeline construction using FMEA-based AHP-MOORA integrated approach under Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 25(7), 1645-1660.
  • Mutlu, N. G., & Altuntas, S. (2019). Risk analysis for occupational safety and health in the textile industry: Integration of FMEA, FTA, and BIFPET methods. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 72, 222-240.
  • Negrichi, K., Di Mascolo, M., & Flaus, J. M. (2012). Risk analysis in sterilization services: A first step towards a generic model of risk. GISEH'2012-6ème conférence francophone en Gestion et Ingénierie des SystèmEs Hospitaliers, Canada.
  • Ocampo, L., Deiparine, C. B., & Go, A. L. (2020). Mapping Strategy to Best Practices for Sustainable Food Manufacturing Using Fuzzy DEMATEL-ANP-TOPSIS. Engineering Management Journal, 32(2), 130-150.
  • Özcan, E., & Kesiktaş, N. (2007). Mesleki kas iskelet hastalıklarından korunma ve ergonomi. İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Dergisi, 7(34): 6-9.
  • Özdener, N., Akbaba M., & Güler, C. (2004). Sağlık boyutuyla ergonomi hekim ve mühendisler için. Palme Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Özkaya, M. O., Yakın, V., & Ekinci, T. (2008). Stres düzeylerinin çalışanların iş doyumu üzerine etkisi Celal Bayar Üniversitesi çalışanları üzerine ampirik bir araştırma. Yönetim ve Ekonomi: Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), 163-179.
  • Özvarış, Ş. B. (1999). Sağlık çalışanlarının enfeksiyonlardan korunması. Sürekli Tıp Yayınları, Ankara.
  • Parlar, S. (2008). A problem that is not considering in health workers: Healthy work environment. TAF-Preventive Medicine Bulletin, 7(6), 547.
  • Reiling, J. G., Knutzen, B. L., & Stoecklein, M. (2003). FMEA-the cure for medical errors. Quality Progress, 36(8), 67-71.
  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw Hill International, New York. Sabuncu, N, K., Babadağ, G., Taşocak, T., Atabek, E, D., & Seçim, H. (2012). Hemşirelik esasları. Açıköğretim Fakültesi Yayınları, Eskişehir.
  • Soykan, Y., Kurnaz, N., & Kayık, M. (2014). Sağlik işletmelerinde hata türü ve etkileri analizi ile bulaşici hastalik risklerinin derecelendirilmesi. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 172-183.
  • Tayran, N., Talas, M. S. (2001) Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Cebeci Hastanesi’nde çalişan hemşirelerin çalişma koşullarindan kaynaklanan perkütan yaralanma durumlarinin incelenmesi. II. Ulusal Klinisyen Hemşire ve Ebeler Kongresi Kongre Kitabı, 21-25 Ekim 2001, Antalya. Trengonowati, D. L., Bahauddin, A., Ridwan, A., & Wulandari, Y. (2021). Proposed action of supply chain risk mitigation air compressor type L unloading ¼ HP using the Fuzzy–FMEA and Fuzzy–AHP method in PT XYZ. Journal of Innovation and Technology, 2(1), 10-17.
  • US Department of Defence, (1980). Procedures for performing a failure mode, effectsand criticality analysis. MIL-STD-1629, November, Washington.
  • Yılmaz, N., & Şenol, M. B. (2017). A fuzzy multi-criteria model for the occupational health and safety risk assessment process and its application. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 32(1), 77-87.
  • Wetterneck, T. B., Skibinski, K., Schroeder, M., Roberts, T. L., & Carayon, P. (2004). Challenges with the performance of failure mode and effects analysis in healthcare organizations: an iv medication administration HFMEA™. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, 48(15), 1708-1712.
Toplam 36 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Müfide Narlı 0000-0001-8225-2911

Elifcan Göçmen 0000-0002-0316-281X

Onur Derse

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Eylül 2021
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021 Cilt: 24 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Narlı, M., Göçmen, E., & Derse, O. (2021). RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 24(3), 571-588.
AMA Narlı M, Göçmen E, Derse O. RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT. HSİD. Eylül 2021;24(3):571-588.
Chicago Narlı, Müfide, Elifcan Göçmen, ve Onur Derse. “RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT”. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi 24, sy. 3 (Eylül 2021): 571-88.
EndNote Narlı M, Göçmen E, Derse O (01 Eylül 2021) RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi 24 3 571–588.
IEEE M. Narlı, E. Göçmen, ve O. Derse, “RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT”, HSİD, c. 24, sy. 3, ss. 571–588, 2021.
ISNAD Narlı, Müfide vd. “RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT”. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi 24/3 (Eylül 2021), 571-588.
JAMA Narlı M, Göçmen E, Derse O. RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT. HSİD. 2021;24:571–588.
MLA Narlı, Müfide vd. “RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT”. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, c. 24, sy. 3, 2021, ss. 571-88.
Vancouver Narlı M, Göçmen E, Derse O. RISK ASSESSMENT USING A NOVEL HYBRID METHOD: A CASE STUDY AT THE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT. HSİD. 2021;24(3):571-88.