Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug 31;15(1):32028.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-17761-0.

A fuzzy based hybrid approach for risk assessment of anesthesiologists using OPA and EDAS methods

Edris Soltani  1 , Atefeh Mohammadinejad  1 , Payam Rashnoudi  1   2 , Omran Ahmadi  3
Affiliations

A fuzzy based hybrid approach for risk assessment of anesthesiologists using OPA and EDAS methods

Edris Soltani et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Anesthesiologists are exposed to numerous occupational hazards due to the demanding nature of their profession and the complex environment in which they operate. Classical risk assessment approaches often fall short in addressing the multidimensional and uncertain nature of these risks. To overcome these limitations, this study introduces a novel hybrid risk assessment model that integrates the Ordinal Priority Approach (OPA) for criteria weighting and the Evaluation based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS) method for risk prioritization. The model utilizes expert judgment and incorporates five key criteria-Consequence, Probability, Detectability, Exposure, and Risk Capacity-to ensure a more accurate and comprehensive risk evaluation. Data were collected through expert interviews and a literature review, and fuzzy logic (interval type-2 fuzzy sets) was employed to manage uncertainty in qualitative assessments. A case study involving 35 identified occupational risks was conducted to evaluate the model's applicability. Results revealed that needlestick injuries (R22) were the most critical risk, followed by exposure to bodily fluids (R21) and airborne transmission of infectious diseases (R10), while exposure to magnetic fields (R4) was ranked lowest. Sensitivity analysis using four alternative weight vectors confirmed the robustness of the model's outputs. The proposed framework not only addresses the drawbacks of classical assessment methods but also provides a transparent, structured, and adaptive approach suitable for complex healthcare environments. This method can serve as a valuable decision-support tool for risk managers and hospital administrators, enabling the development of effective preventive strategies that enhance workplace safety for anesthesiology professionals.

Keywords: Anesthesiologists; EDAS method; Fuzzy logic; OPA method; Risk assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the institutional ethics committee of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences with ethical code of IR.UMSHA.REC.1402.269. All participants provided written informed consent before participating voluntarily. They were also informed that they could withdraw from the study without any consequences. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Hybrid risk assessment model for anesthesiologists.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Final weights of the criteria.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Prioritizing the risks of anesthesiologists.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
the line chart of parameters’ sensitivity analysis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Verma, R. et al. Anesthesiologist: the silent force behind the scene. Anesth. Essays Res. 9, 293–297 (2015). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beloeil, H. & Albaladejo, P. Initiatives to broaden safety concerns in anaesthetic practice: the green operating room. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Anaesthesiol.35, 83–91 (2021). - PubMed
    1. Bajwa, S. J. S. & Kaur, J. Risk and safety concerns in anesthesiology practice: the present perspective. Anesth. Essays Res. 6, 14–20 (2012). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Romito, B. T., Okoro, E. N., Ringqvist, J. R. B. & Goff, K. L. Burnout and wellness: the anesthesiologist’s perspective. Am. J. Lifestyle Med.15, 118–125. 10.1177/1559827620911645 (2021). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fouad, A. M., Fahim, A. E., Bedewy, A. A., Al-Touny, A. & Al-Touny, S. A. Work-related musculoskeletal complaints and ergonomic risk factors among Egyptian anesthesiologists: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public. Health. 24, 279 (2024). - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources