Although custom prosthetic bone replacements produced through a new computer-aided design process will cost more than twice as much as ordinary replacements, custom replacements should still be cost-effective. Not only will surgery and recovery time be reduced, but custom replacements should last longer; thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays.
Which of the following must be studied in order to evaluate the argument presented above?
(A) The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery
(B) The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them
(C) The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements
(D) The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements
(E) The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale
Disclaimer: for those of you who worry about the source I can surely admit that KAPLAN
, ARCO and BARRONS are not it!!! And by the way, is there any explicit list about what sources not to post the questions from... I haven't seen it and I urge everyone just to answer the questions... I received a couple of PMs about this... saying the questions I posted were good.... and some of you are not really happy.... I am
but I guess you can't please everyone!!!
I'll go with C.
1. The amount of time spent on surgery and recovery is irrelevant, we need to focus on costs here.
2.The cost of producing these custom replacements might be down but that doesnt help us evaluate whether we will need to spend more on these replacements in the future.
3. Yes- this helps , only if this new replacement minimises or eliminates further surgery only then will it justify the investment, else you need to shell out more money. If this replacement requires surgery as frequently then the ordinary treatment holds good.
4. Manufacturing safety is not the issue here.
5. Production cost is irrelevant.
u2, chillax, just post whatever you have to, people are free to respond if they're interested.