Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment
Abstract. Nowadays, Chinese people have a significantly increasing demand for high quality
of health-care, which needs to be satisfied by renovation projects of existing Buildings. To
improve the risks management skills, this paper used Fuzzy AHP Method to build a risk
evaluation system. To test the effectiveness of model, “Beijing FC hospital” is introduced as
study samples. The result shows that risk evaluation system based on the Fuzzy AHP was
effective and the total risk of renovation project in Beijing FC hospital is medium.
1. Introduction
People’s awareness of health has changed by the changing in population structure, development of
science and technology and aging population [1]. As an important part of China's medical and health
system, hospitals have played a huge role in safeguarding people's livelihood and promoting social
harmony and stability. To improve the quality of health-care, hospitals need to conduct renovation
projects of existing building in hospitals. But renovation projects in hospitals are complicated, which
need to strengthen the risks management to increase economic and social benefits of renovation
projects [2]. Before a project conducted, it is necessary to evaluate the potential risks. Risks evaluation
system can be effective in evaluating the weakness of risks management in one project [3]. Currently,
researched on the hospital risk mainly take the qualitative analysis, and researchers seldom take the
medical risk caused by the construction into to consideration. Based on above, this paper used
Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method to build a risks evaluation
system, and introduced an actual projects as sample.
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICTETS 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 688 (2019) 055078 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/688/5/055078
(2) Weight calculation. First find the Feature vector W of the matrix, and then normalize it to
2
ICTETS 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 688 (2019) 055078 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/688/5/055078
n
make it equal to W = 1 , then we can find the relative importance of B for A
i =1
i m, which means wight.
1) Calculating the product Mi of the values of each row of the matrix and calculate the n-th root
of Mi, as shown in the following.
__
Wi = n Mi = n
b ij (1)
__
T
2)
__ __
__ __
W
Normalizing the vector Wi = W1 ,W2 ,.......,Wn , which means Wi = i __ , then
W i
( BW )i
Judging matrix maximum eigenvalue max = nWi
. (2)
(3) Fault tolerance judgment and error analysis. In the evaluation process, the indicator
cannot accurately determine the value of bij and can only estimate it. If there is an error in the
estimation, the eigenvalues of the judgment matrix will inevitably be deviated. Therefore, after finding
max a consistency check is required.
1) Calculating consistency indicator CI.
(max − n)
CI = (3)
(n − 1)
For different judgment matrices, the CI values are also different. In general, the larger the order n,
the larger the CI value. In order to measure whether the different order judgment matrices have
satisfactory consistency, the average random consistency index RI value of the judgment matrix is
introduced. The RI value is a random method for n=1-9, each constructing 500 sample matrices,
calculating the CI value of the consistency index, and then obtaining the RI on average, as shown in
the following table.
Table 2. RI values
Matrix order 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
RI 0 0 0.58 0.9 1.12 1.24 1.36 1.41 1.46 1.49 1.52
2) Calculating the consistency ratio CR.
CR = CI (4)
RI
If CR<0.1 , then the judgment matrix can be considered to have satisfactory consistency,
otherwise the judgment matrix needs to be adjusted.
(4) Combined weight calculation. After calculating the weight of each level of indicators to
the upper level indicators, we can start from the top level and find the combined weights of the
indicators at all levels from the top down. According to the index layer C risk factor relative criterion
layer B risk factor eigenvector set W and criterion layer B risk factor relative evaluation target A
system risk eigenvector V, index layer C risk factor relative to the evaluation target A system feature
vector U, as seen in the following.
U = W V (5)
3
ICTETS 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 688 (2019) 055078 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/688/5/055078
3. Case Study
4
ICTETS 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 688 (2019) 055078 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/688/5/055078
Comment Set
t1 t2 t3 t4 t5
From table 3 we can get risk factor membership vector matrix, as shown in the following.
5
ICTETS 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 688 (2019) 055078 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/688/5/055078
4. Conclusion
Hospital renovation projects are complicated because of medical activity. Identifying project risk
factors according to the stage of the life cycle can comprehensively and systematically analyze the
risks existing in hospital infrastructure projects, and has guided significance for risk management in
actual work. The risk was evaluated using the analytic hierarchy process and the fuzzy comprehensive
evaluation method. This model can assess the risk of renovation project in hospital effectively, risk
level of the Beijing hospital project belongs to the medium level, which mainly lie in design and
construction stage.
Acknowledgments
This work is funded by the project of “Study on the technical guidelines for the comprehensive
performance improvement planning of hospitals existing buildings” (H18131) and “General technical
investigation of wall materials and roof insulation materials for village buildings” (H18202).
References
[1] Cao Y, Li M, Guo Y. Analysis of the design and renovation of mid-sized hospital's local area
network]. [J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Instrumentation, 2011, 35(6):465.
[2] Yi-Kai J, Yu-Ching C, Yeng-Horng P, et al. Optimal Decision Model for Sustainable Hospital
Building Renovation—A Case Study of a Vacant School Building Converting into a
Community Public Hospital[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 2016, 13(7):630.
6
ICTETS 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 688 (2019) 055078 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/688/5/055078
[3] Islam M S, Nepal M P, Skitmore M, et al. Current research trends and application areas of fuzzy
and hybrid methods to the risk assessment of construction projects[J]. Advanced Engineering
Informatics, 2017, 33:112-131.
[4] Taylan O, Bafail A O, Abdulaal R M S, et al. Construction projects selection and risk assessment
by fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methodologies[J]. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 2014,
17(4):105-116.