Document Type : Review Article
Authors
1
Department of Occupational Health Engineering,. Saveh University of Medical .Sciences, Saveh, Iran
2
School of Health, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
10.22034/sumsj.2026.582935.1105
Abstract
Introduction: The selection of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) constitutes a pivotal pillar of risk management within occupational settings. Given its multidimensional nature, this process necessitates the simultaneous evaluation of technical, ergonomic, economic, and behavioral criteria. Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methodologies serve as robust frameworks for structuring such complex decision-making processes and enhancing the overall quality of outcomes. Accordingly, this study examines the utility of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods in optimizing PPE selection.
Methods: Through a narrative review framework, this research explores the utility of MCDM approaches in the context of PPE selection. Data collection involved a search of Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, employing specific keyword combinations to ensure comprehensive coverage. The search strategy utilized a combination of Boolean operators (AND/OR) encompassing keywords such as Multi-Criteria Decision Making, MCDM, AHP, TOPSIS, Fuzzy, VIKOR, ELECTRE, Personal Protective Equipment, PPE selection, Safety equipment selection, and Occupational health. Articles were included without restriction on study type, year, or language. However, studies failing to provide comprehensive data, such as conference abstracts lacking full-text availability, were excluded from the review.
Results: The findings indicate that MCDM techniques facilitate the concurrent management of multifaceted criteria including protective performance, comfort, fit, cost-effectiveness, and user acceptance by formalizing the evaluation process. These methods enhance analytical realism by integrating quantitative and qualitative data, particularly in scenarios characterized by subjectivity or ambiguity.
Conclusion: Integrating MCDM methodologies into PPE selection transforms intuitive, subjective choices into a structured, evidence-based process, effectively managing complex decision-making scenarios. While these frameworks enhance transparency, selection quality, and user acceptance, their ultimate efficacy depends on seamless alignment with comprehensive occupational health protocols, specifically hazard assessment, stakeholder engagement, and post-implementation evaluation. A comparative analysis of these techniques reveals that methodologies such as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), TOPSIS, fuzzy-set theories, and outranking models are each uniquely suited to distinct data structures and situational contexts. Essentially, the primary function of MCDM extends beyond simple alternative ranking; it serves to elucidate trade-offs and bolster the defensibility of decision-making in occupational health contexts.
Keywords
