Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making and Sensitivity Analysis for Selection of Materials for Knee Implant Femoral Component
Total knee replacement (TKR) is a remarkable achievement in biomedical science that enhances human life. However, human beings still suffer from knee-joint-related problems such as aseptic loosening caused by excessive wear between articular surfaces, stress-shielding of the bone by prosthesis, and...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Materials 2021-04, Vol.14 (8), p.2084 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Total knee replacement (TKR) is a remarkable achievement in biomedical science that enhances human life. However, human beings still suffer from knee-joint-related problems such as aseptic loosening caused by excessive wear between articular surfaces, stress-shielding of the bone by prosthesis, and soft tissue development in the interface of bone and implant due to inappropriate selection of TKR material. The choice of most suitable materials for the femoral component of TKR is a critical decision; therefore, in this research paper, a hybrid multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) tactic is applied using the degree of membership (DoM) technique with a varied system, using the weighted sum method (WSM), the weighted product method (WPM), the weighted aggregated sum product assessment method (WASPAS), an evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS), and a technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS). The weights of importance are assigned to different criteria by the equal weights method (EWM). Furthermore, sensitivity analysis is conducted to check the solidity of the projected tactic. The weights of importance are varied using the entropy weights technique (EWT) and the standard deviation method (SDM). The projected hybrid MCDM methodology is simple, reliable and valuable for a conflicting decision-making environment. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1996-1944 1996-1944 |
DOI: | 10.3390/ma14082084 |