J Global Clinical Engineering Vol.5 Issue 1: 2022 18

Received April 14, 2021, accepted May 18, 2022, date of publication May 23, 2022

Application of the AHP Method in Prioritizing the Criteria 
for the Selection of Calibration Services Provider

By Marcelo A. Marciano1, Anderson Alves do Santos2, William K. Souza2  

1 Moinhos de Vento Hospital/Clinical and Hospital Engineering Coordination, Porto Alegre, Brasil 

2 Moinhos de Vento Hospital/Clinical Engineering, Porto Alegre, Brasil

ABSTRACT

SChoosing the best instruments, measurement techniques and the most qualified service provider is of paramount importance 
for an equipment calibration service. For the definition of the most qualified company, selection criteria and weights related to 
the criteria will be used. Thus, the main objective of this work is to choose the best service provider, that is, the most qualified to 
perform the calibration services of medical and hospital equipment, considering the listed criteria. The method used was AHP 
(Analytic Hierarchy Process). It makes it possible to prioritize, give weight and validate the consistency of the evaluation criteria 
(considering the importance and relevance). As a result, the validation of the criteria weights was obtained. The company that 
obtained the best score was the company hired for the service.  

Keywords – Medical equipment, Calibration, Selection service provider, AHP method.

Copyright © 2021. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY): Creative Commons - Attribu-
tion 4.0 International - CC BY 4.0. The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) 
are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is 
permitted which does not comply with these terms.

http://www.globalce.org
http://globalce.org
http://globalce.org


19 J Global Clinical Engineering Vol.5 Issue 1: 2022

Marciano, Alves do Santos, Souza : Application of the AHP Method in Prioritizing the Criteria for the Selection of 
Calibration Services Provider

INTRODUCTION

The calibration of equipment, that is, the comparison 
of biomedical/physiological quantities measured or pro-
vided by biomedical equipment, compared to a standard, 
provide each equipment's errors. An internal team can 
calibrate biomedical equipment, provided qualified, with 
defined calibration procedures, appropriate instruments, 
traceability, etc. When calibration is performed by a 
third-party service provider, it is appropriate to perform 
a calibration process, with defined criteria.1 Enable the 
validation of the consistency of weights and measure-
ments of the selection criteria. Contribute in such a way 
that the best qualified company performs the calibration 
services of the equipment. Maximizing patient safety. One 
of the known methods is the AHP (Analytic Hierarchy 
Process) Method,2 which makes it possible to prioritize, 
give weight and validate the consistency of the evaluation 
criteria (considering the importance and relevance).3 SCB 
Associates4 proposes a model to validate the consistency 
of the weights assigned to each requirement evaluated. 
It is possible to use a scale with paired views of evalua-
tion parameters to assess the degree of importance.5 The 
main objective of this work is to choose the best service 
provider company, that is, the most qualified to perform 
medical-hospital equipment calibration services. Consider-
ing that the selection criteria and their weights will serve 
as a reference to choosing the company that obtains the 
best score, the specific objectives are: to prioritize, give 
weight and validate the consistency of the evaluation 
criteria (considering the importance and relevance) for 
the selection of service providers of calibration of medi-
cal- hospital equipment.   

METHOD 

The method used was the AHP,2 which allows prioritiz-
ing the evaluation criteria (considering the importance 
and relevance). The model provided by SCB Associates,4 
to validate the consistency of the weights assigned to 
each requirement evaluated. The following (Fig. 1) dem-
onstrates the fundamental scale, with nine classifications 
of importance used in this model. 

The initial weights for each criterion were defined 
by a specialized clinical engineering group composed of 
professionals with training of various academic levels and 

professional experiences of up to 25 years in the area. 
With expertise in calibration laboratory and calibration 
services. Quality national and international certifications. 
As well as knowledge of norms related to the subject. A 
spreadsheet was sent with the 14 evaluation criteria for 
each service provider who participated in the selection 
to obtain the answers.

RESULTS 

The matrix (Figure 2) below demonstrates the degree 
of importance given, according to a fundamental scale 
(as shown in Figure 1), in the paired comparations of 14 
evaluation parameters. 

The consistency index achieved with the method was 
7% (Figure 3), indicating a good weight distribution.6 

Then, considering the response of the service providers 
to the selection criteria, the specialized group of clinical 
engineering, listed the notes to each of the companies 
(Figure 4) so that it was possible to obtain the answer 
of which service provider was the best to perform the 
calibration of medical equipment.7

FIGURE 1. The schematic diagram of dental units.



J Global Clinical Engineering Vol.5 Issue 1: 2022  20

Marciano, Alves do Santos, Souza : Application of the AHP Method in Prioritizing the Criteria for the Selection of 
Calibration Services Provider

DISCUSSION 

It is important to highlight that it is necessary to 
evaluate and select the calibration service providers of 
biomedical equipment. The AHP methodology for the 
listed evaluation criteria was shown to be consistent. 
However, there can always be points to be improved and 
new versions to be proposed and tested, from this model. 
Or considering other models. 

CONCLUSION 

The AHP methodology proved to be adherent and 
assisted in the selection protocol of a calibration service 
provider. That is, it helped validate the weights of the 
criteria listed to evaluate the quality of the provider. 
Thus, it contributed to hiring the most qualified company 
to perform the calibration services of biomedical equip-
ment, considering the criteria listed. The application of 
this method improved the evaluation process and choice 
of the provider, impartially increasing confidence and 
comprehensiveness. Considering that the equipment park 
is dynamic, each year changes with new approaches and 
technologies. Given the above, it can be observed that 
the implemented proposition of improving this selection 
process was successfully achieved. 

REFERENCES

1. Critérios de seleção de serviços de calibração de equi-
pamentos eletromédicos. Marciano, Marcelo Antunes; 
Santos, Anderson Alves. XV CONGRESSO BRASILEIRO 
DE ENGENHARIA BIOMÉDICA, 2016. Foz do Iguaçu, 
Paraná, Brasil.  

2. Saaty TL (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. N. 
York, USA: McGraw-Hill. 

3. Saaty TL (2005). Theory and applications of the Ana-
lytic Network Process. Decision making with benefits, 
opportunities, costs, and risks. Pittsburgh, USA: RWS. 

4. SCB Associates Ltd. Barnard S. et al. (2012). Processo 
de hierarquia analítica, AHP” planilha “AHP Template 
SCBUK.xls. Disponível em: http://www.scbuk.com/
ahp.html. Acessado em: 26/06/2019. 

FIGURE 2. Model provided by SCB Associates.4 

FIGURE 3. Consistency index achieved with the method. 

FIGURE 4. Supplier's notes for each criterion. 

http://www.scbuk.com/ahp.html
http://www.scbuk.com/ahp.html


21 J Global Clinical Engineering Vol.5 Issue 1: 2022

Marciano, Alves do Santos, Souza : Application of the AHP Method in Prioritizing the Criteria for the Selection of 
Calibration Services Provider

5. Marins FAS, et al. (2010). Métodos de tomada de de-
cisão com múltiplos critérios. aplicações na indústria 
aeroespacial. S. Paulo: Blucher. 

6. Sloane EB. Using a Decision Support System Tool for 
Healthcare Technology Assessments. IEEE Engineer-
ing in Medicine and Biology Magazine 2004; May/
June:44-55. 

7. Hajdau C and  Spiridonica A. AHP — Based weighting 
of criteria for medical equipment selection," 2015 
E-Health and Bioengineering Conference (EHB), IASI 
2015; 1-5. doi: 10.1109/EHB.2015.7391519