With increasing costs of hospital visits and increased availability of

Question

With increasing costs of hospital visits and increased availability of sophisticated home equipment, it is expected that more and more people will receive post-operative treatment of chronic conditions at home. A recent survey, however, says otherwise. The survey discovered that the majority of respondents who recently received equipment for treatment at home reported no reduction in the number of hospital visits.

Which additional information, if true, about the patients who received sophisticated home equipment can be taken into account along with the information above to evaluate whether providing the equipment is likely to lead to a net decrease in the number of visits and hence the corresponding treatment costs?

A. The proportion of patients who visited the hospital for post-operative care or treatment of chronic diseases versus those who visited to get trained on how to operate the equipment. 
B. The initial out of pocket costs borne by patients receiving the equipment to the costs borne by patients opting for post-operative care at the hospital. 
C. Comparison of the time required to render post-operative care at home with that at the hospital. 
D. The extent to which the patients who had sophisticated home equipment met their professional commitments. 
E. The number of treatments that patients have to go through when using sophisticated home equipment versus that when visiting a hospital.

globaldesi · Answer

Given passage only compares the number of visits. It no where mentions what those visits are for.
A helps clearly resolve this inconsistency that these visits are for
"The proportion of patients who visited the hospital for post-operative care or treatment of chronic diseases versus those who visited to get trained on how to operate the equipment."
for learning how to operate.

Hence A is the clear winner.

fireflyejd1 · Answer

A. The proportion of patients who visited the hospital for post-operative care or treatment of chronic diseases versus those who visited to get trained on how to operate the equipment.   Patients do not continue to visit hospital because they are not receiving home treatment. The continue visiting BECAUSE they do not know how to properly employ the home treatment. Or vice versa. This consideration can help us evaluate and understand whether people reduced going to the hospital because they receive better treatment at home ( or not ).

B. The initial out of pocket costs borne by patients receiving the equipment to the costs borne by patients opting for post-operative care at the hospital.   The cost is not the main idea of the conclusion. The main idea is whether people will continue getting treated in the hospital or at home.

C. Comparison of the time required to render post-operative care at home with that at the hospital.   . Same reason as B applies here.

D. The extent to which the patients who had sophisticated home equipment met their professional commitments.   Even if they met the professional requirements, do they visit the hospital less now because home care is sufficient? This statement does not help us evaluate that. 
 
E. The number of treatments that patients have to go through when using sophisticated home equipment versus that when visiting a hospital 
Why is this important? We only want to know if people reduced hospital visits because home treatment is adequate or not.

Ranasaymon · Answer

Which additional information, if true, about the patients who received sophisticated home equipment can be taken into account along with the information above to evaluate whether providing the equipment is likely to lead to a net decrease in the number of visits and hence the corresponding treatment costs?

Conclusion:   Providing the home equipment is likely to lead to a net decrease in the number of visits and hence the corresponding treatment costs
Given,
1. Availability of equipment
2. Increasing costs of hospital
  
Assumption:   People are well trained to use the home equipment.

POE:  
A. The proportion of patients who visited the hospital for post-operative care or treatment of chronic diseases versus those who visited to get trained on how to operate the equipment.   Correct

It matches with our assumption.

B. The initial out of  pocket costs  borne by patients receiving the equipment to the costs borne by patients opting for post-operative care at the hospital.   Incorrect

Out of Scope. Costs does not make any difference in conclusion.

C.  Comparison of the time  required to render post-operative care at home with that at the hospital.   Incorrect

Duration of the time is irrelevant here.

D. The extent to which the patients who had sophisticated home equipment met their  professional commitments.   Incorrect

Professional commitments is out of scope.

E. The  number of treatments  that patients have to go through when using sophisticated home equipment versus that when visiting a hospital.   Incorrect

Out of scope

Crytiocanalyst · Answer

A. The proportion of patients who visited the hospital for post-operative care or treatment of chronic diseases versus those who visited to get trained on how to operate the equipment. 
This helps us understand whether post operative care in home can be feasible and whether the no of visits done by the patients can be reduced by teaching them the same therefore let us keep it

B. The initial out of pocket costs borne by patients receiving the equipment to the costs borne by patients opting for post-operative care at the hospital. 
This doesn't help us give any long term perspective about anything therefore out

C. Comparison of the time required to render post-operative care at home with that at the hospital. 
'Time' is a far fetched argument cannot be absolutely determiniastic since different people take different time and the time each patient has is different therefore out

D. The extent to which the patients who had sophisticated home equipment met their professional commitments. 
Professional commitments is a long shot we have absolutely no clue as of what it indicates therefore out

E. The number of treatments that patients have to go through when using sophisticated home equipment versus that when visiting a hospital.
A better assess the situation therefore out

THerefore IMO A

napolean92728 · Answer

Explanation: 
The  core issue  here is evaluating  whether providing sophisticated home equipment can reduce hospital visits  (and thus reduce costs). The survey said that  hospital visits did not reduce , but we don’t yet know  why .

✅ Why  A  is the best answer:
 
 It  directly addresses a possible explanation  for the survey results. 
 If  many hospital visits were just for training  on how to use the new equipment (rather than for actual treatment), this would  artificially inflate  the number of hospital visits  in the short term . 
 Once training is complete, visits may drop—suggesting the equipment  could still lead to long-term cost savings . 
 This information would help  distinguish between visits for learning the equipment vs. visits due to medical need , which is  key to evaluating  its effectiveness in reducing visits.

❌ Why the other options are wrong or less relevant:
 B. The initial out-of-pocket costs borne by patients receiving the equipment vs. those receiving hospital care. 
 
 ❌ This relates to  who pays  and how much they pay, not the  number of hospital visits . 
 We're evaluating  net change in visits and treatment costs , not  individual financial burdens .  
 C. Comparison of time required to render care at home vs. at hospital. 
 
 ❌ Time comparison doesn't tell us  how many visits  occurred or were avoided. 
 It's about  efficiency or convenience , not about  cost reduction via fewer visits .  
 D. The extent to which patients met professional commitments. 
 
 ❌ Irrelevant. Professional commitments (jobs, duties, etc.) are not related to  healthcare cost or visit frequency . 
 It might be useful for quality-of-life studies but  not for evaluating cost-effectiveness .  
 E. Number of treatments needed with equipment vs. hospital visits. 
 
 ❌ Looks useful at first, but it’s about the  quantity of treatments , not  how many hospital trips  were required. 
 A patient could have many treatments at home but still make fewer hospital visits, which is what we care about.

rak08 · Answer

doesnt the cost affect the net decrease
like if my out of pocket costs is higher in case of equipment buying then i will go to the hospital
A just makes a formula out of the question

napolean92728 · Answer

See here the main concern is number of hospital visits, money is secondary, like if the equipment though costly but gives you higher comfort or is easy to use etc. then you might not prefer going to hospital and hence reduce the visits.

With increasing costs of hospital visits and increased availability of

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

With increasing costs of hospital visits and increased availability of

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards