Using the analytic hierarchy process to prioritize alternative medicine: selecting the most suitable medicine for patients with diabetes

 
 
 
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract


    Diabetes mellitus (DM) is emerging as a major public health problem in Saudi Arabia and this disease affects the Middle East in general. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was performed to select the most appropriate oral hypoglycemic agent for use as a monotherapy among newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes. Eight important criteria resulted from the hierarchy structure: side effects, chronic disease, background scientific evidence, age, weight, cost, education level, and gender. The involvement of these different factors reveals that treating diabetes is a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) problem. Thus, AHP was used because it is one of the most common MCDM tools. This project developed a mathematical decision-making model that prioritizes the available medications for patients with diabetes in terms of the aforementioned criteria. Oral type 2 diabetes medications (metformin, pioglitazone, sitagliptin, and glimepiride) were ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th, respectively; their weights were 48.42%, 24.47%, 13.61% and 13.50%, respectively. Thus, metformin is recommended because it has the highest weight. Side effects were the most important factor affecting drug selection. The AHP provides an overall ranking to aid with final decisions. Unquestionably, the results of this project, or at least the proposed methodology, facilitate the decision-making process, which is important because it assists the decision maker in determining which oral drug to choose for newly diagnosed patients with diabetes.


  • Keywords


    Analytic Hierarchy Process; Diabetes.

  • References


      [1] L. Dean, J. McEntyre, editors, National Center for Biotechnology Information, The Genetic Landscape of Diabetes, NCBI, Bethesda MD, 2004.

      [2] K. Alqurashi, K.S. Aljabri, S.A. Bokhari, Prevalence of diabetes mellitus in a Saudi community, Annals of Saudi Medicine 31 (2011) 19-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0256-4947.75773.

      [3] M.M. Al-nozha, M.A. Al-maatouq, Y.Y. Al-mazrou, S.S. Al-Harthi, M.R. Arafah, Diabetes mellitus in Saudi Arabia, Saudi Medical Journal 25 (2004) 1603-1610.

      [4] R. Sicree, J. Shaw, P. Baker, (2010), the global burden: diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance. http://www.idf.org/sites/default/files/The_Global_Burden.pdf. Accessed 4 May, 2014.

      [5] T.L. Saaty, A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15 (1977) 234–281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5.

      [6] T.L. Saaty, the Analytic Hierarchy Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA, 1996.

      [7] T.L. Saaty, Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process, Management Science 32 (1986) 841-855. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.7.841.

      [8] B.G. Mirkin, Group Choice, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1979.

      [9] T.L. Saaty, the Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1980.

      [10] T.L. Saaty, How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process, Interfaces 24 (1994) 19-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.24.6.19.

      [11] T.L. Saaty, Fundamentals of Decision Making, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA, 1994.

      [12] J.S. Dyer, Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process, Management Science 36 (1990) 249–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.249.

      [13] J.S. Dyer, A clarification of ‘remarks on the analytic hierarchy process’, Management Science 36 (1990) 274–275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.274.

      [14] P.T. Harker, L.G. Vargas, Reply to ‘remarks on the analytic hierarchy process’ by J. S. Dyer, Management Science 36 (1990) 269–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.269.

      [15] T.L. Saaty, An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper ‘remarks on the analytic hierarchy process’, Management Science 36 (1990) 259–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.259.

      [16] R.L. Winkler, Decision modeling and rational choice: AHP and utility theory, Management Science 36 (1990) 247–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.247.

      [17] M. Hatcher, Voting and priorities in health care decision making, portrayed through a group decision support system, using analytic hierarchy process, Journal of Medical Systems 18 (1994) 267–288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00996606.

      [18] E.B. Sloane, M.J. Liberatore, R.L. Nydick, Medical decision support using the analytic hierarchy process, Journal of Healthcare Information Management 16 (2002) 38–43.

      [19] M.J. Liberatore, R.L. Nydick, The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: A literature review, European Journal of Operational Research 189 (2008) 194–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.05.001.

      [20] J.G. Dolan, Medical decision making using the analytic hierarchy process: choice of initial antimicrobial therapy for acute pyelonephritis, Medical Decision Making 9 (1989) 51–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X8900900109.


 

View

Download

Article ID: 5607
 
DOI: 10.14419/ijbas.v5i1.5607




Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.