Integrated Multicriteria Decision-Making Methods to Solve Supplier Selection Problem: A Case Study in a Hospital

<table class="table-group" id="tab4"><tr><td><table class="table"><tr><td class="thead-hr" colspan="6"><hr/></td></tr><tr class="thead"><td class="align_left"> </td><td class="align_center"><span style="width: 12.3377ptpx;"><svg height="14.7403pt" id="M130" style="vertical-align:-3.943601pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -10.7967 12.3377 14.7403" width="12.3377pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M449 634C442 637 425 643 405 650C376 660 341 666 307 666C181 666 98 590 98 485C98 400 170 343 215 310L246 288C307 243 343 204 343 147C343 67 291 18 219 18C104 18 61 124 51 202L23 199C28 124 27 71 27 47C47 22 122 -16 204 -16C324 -16 428 60 428 174C428 256 379 309 307 360L276 382C223 419 179 455 179 516C179 576 221 632 293 632C379 632 410 564 418 487L448 490C446 536 446 592 449 634Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,6.136,-5.741)"><path d="M556 236V289H337V504H275V289H56V236H275V-4H337V236H556Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,6.071,3.784)"><path d="M250 606C250 634 233 656 203 656C168 656 146 618 146 593C146 564 169 545 192 545C227 545 250 573 250 606ZM227 95L212 119C187 98 152 71 135 71C129 71 128 78 134 102L207 373C219 418 217 451 194 451C165 451 92 411 30 351L44 326C77 353 106 371 114 371C124 371 121 357 117 341L55 97C32 5 46 -12 70 -12C108 -12 191 51 227 95Z"></path></g></svg></span></td><td class="align_center"><span style="width: 12.3377ptpx;"><svg height="14.7403pt" id="M131" style="vertical-align:-3.943601pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -10.7967 12.3377 14.7403" width="12.3377pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M449 634C442 637 425 643 405 650C376 660 341 666 307 666C181 666 98 590 98 485C98 400 170 343 215 310L246 288C307 243 343 204 343 147C343 67 291 18 219 18C104 18 61 124 51 202L23 199C28 124 27 71 27 47C47 22 122 -16 204 -16C324 -16 428 60 428 174C428 256 379 309 307 360L276 382C223 419 179 455 179 516C179 576 221 632 293 632C379 632 410 564 418 487L448 490C446 536 446 592 449 634Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,6.136,-5.741)"><path d="M556 236V289H56V236H556Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,6.071,3.784)"><path d="M250 606C250 634 233 656 203 656C168 656 146 618 146 593C146 564 169 545 192 545C227 545 250 573 250 606ZM227 95L212 119C187 98 152 71 135 71C129 71 128 78 134 102L207 373C219 418 217 451 194 451C165 451 92 411 30 351L44 326C77 353 106 371 114 371C124 371 121 357 117 341L55 97C32 5 46 -12 70 -12C108 -12 191 51 227 95Z"></path></g></svg></span></td><td class="align_center">Total</td><td class="align_center"><span style="width: 14.8953ptpx;"><svg height="14.7403pt" id="M132" style="vertical-align:-3.943601pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -10.7967 14.8953 14.7403" width="14.8953pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M645 631C614 643 545 666 457 666C215 666 23 519 23 283C23 90 158 -16 337 -16C412 -16 489 2 522 10C543 39 590 127 606 167L580 181C519 89 459 18 348 18C201 18 122 136 122 287C122 464 244 632 435 632C544 632 602 595 608 472L639 475C643 526 645 581 645 631Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,8.684,-5.741)"><path d="M556 236V289H337V504H275V289H56V236H275V-4H337V236H556Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,8.619,3.784)"><path d="M250 606C250 634 233 656 203 656C168 656 146 618 146 593C146 564 169 545 192 545C227 545 250 573 250 606ZM227 95L212 119C187 98 152 71 135 71C129 71 128 78 134 102L207 373C219 418 217 451 194 451C165 451 92 411 30 351L44 326C77 353 106 371 114 371C124 371 121 357 117 341L55 97C32 5 46 -12 70 -12C108 -12 191 51 227 95Z"></path></g></svg></span></td><td class="align_center">Rank orders of AHP-TOPSIS</td></tr><tr><td class="thead-hr" colspan="6"><hr/></td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Supplier1</td><td class="align_center">0.067</td><td class="align_center">0.471</td><td class="align_center">0.539</td><td class="align_center">0.876</td><td class="align_center">1</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Supplier2</td><td class="align_center">0.383</td><td class="align_center">0.174</td><td class="align_center">0.557</td><td class="align_center">0.312</td><td class="align_center">2</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Supplier3</td><td class="align_center">0.469</td><td class="align_center">0.105</td><td class="align_center">0.574</td><td class="align_center">0.182</td><td class="align_center">3</td></tr><tr class="table-tr"><td colspan="6"><hr class="tbody-hr"/></td></tr></table></td></tr></table>

<div>Relative closeness and sorting results.</div>

Journal of Healthcare Engineering

tab4

Table 4

Table 4: Integrated Multicriteria Decision-Making Methods to Solve Supplier Selection Problem: A Case Study in a Hospital 