Newspaper article: People with damaged knees and hips can now undergo minimally invasive joint-replacement surgery. In this new procedure, less...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Mock

Critical Reasoning

Paradox

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Newspaper article:

People with damaged knees and hips can now undergo minimally invasive joint-replacement surgery. In this new procedure, less tissue and muscle are cut than in traditional surgery, with the goal of enabling patients to recover more quickly. Further, the cost of the surgery is roughly the same as traditional joint replacement, and patients often lower their total bills through shorter postoperative hospital stays. Nevertheless patients who wish for the best chance of minimizing recovery time often opt for traditional surgery.

Which of the following, if true, would most help to account for the patients' choice?

Most hospital offer both the traditional and the new joint replacement procedures.

With longer recovery times there is an increased risk of complications such as blood clots and infections

The cost of postoperative hospital stays following traditional joint replacement surgery can be as high as the cost of the operation itself

Patients who have undergone minimally invasive procedures use less pain medication than do those who have undergone traditional procedures

The patients know that surgeons who have extensive experience performing a procedure are much less likely to make errors that can be corrected only with extensive physical therapy

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
People with damaged knees and hips can now undergo minimally invasive joint-replacement surgery.	What it says: New surgery option exists for knee and hip problems What it does: Sets up the topic by introducing a medical advance What it is: Author's factual statement
In this new procedure, less tissue and muscle are cut than in traditional surgery, with the goal of enabling patients to recover more quickly.	What it says: New method cuts less tissue/muscle and aims for faster recovery What it does: Explains how the new surgery works and its main benefit What it is: Author's explanation Visualization: Traditional surgery = cuts through 100 units of tissue, New surgery = cuts through 30 units of tissue → faster healing time
Further, the cost of the surgery is roughly the same as traditional joint replacement, and patients often lower their total bills through shorter postoperative hospital stays.	What it says: New surgery costs the same but can save money through shorter hospital stays What it does: Adds more advantages to make the new surgery sound even better What it is: Author's claim Visualization: Surgery cost = $20,000 (both methods), but Traditional recovery = 7 days in hospital vs New method = 3 days → lower total bill
Nevertheless patients who wish for the best chance of minimizing recovery time often opt for traditional surgery.	What it says: Patients wanting fastest recovery still choose the old surgery method What it does: Creates a puzzle by contradicting what we'd expect from the previous benefits What it is: Author's surprising observation

Argument Flow:

The passage presents a puzzle by first listing all the benefits of new minimally invasive surgery (less cutting, faster recovery goal, same cost, shorter hospital stays), then revealing the surprising fact that patients wanting quick recovery still choose traditional surgery.

Main Conclusion:

There's a contradiction between what we'd expect (patients choosing the seemingly better new surgery) and what actually happens (patients choosing traditional surgery for faster recovery).

Logical Structure:

This isn't a typical argument with premises supporting a conclusion. Instead, it sets up a paradox that needs explaining - if the new surgery has all these advantages for recovery, why do recovery-focused patients choose the old method? The question asks us to resolve this puzzle.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Paradox - We need to resolve the contradiction between minimally invasive surgery being designed for faster recovery yet patients wanting fastest recovery choose traditional surgery

Precision of Claims

The key claims are about recovery time (quality), surgical methods (activity), and patient choice patterns (frequency). The paradox is specifically about patients who want 'the best chance of minimizing recovery time' choosing traditional over minimally invasive surgery

Strategy

For paradox questions, we need to find information that explains why the seemingly contradictory behavior actually makes sense. We should look for reasons why traditional surgery might actually provide faster recovery despite minimally invasive surgery being designed for that purpose. We need to respect all the facts given - that minimally invasive surgery cuts less tissue, costs the same, and is designed for faster recovery, but patients wanting fastest recovery still choose traditional surgery

Answer Choices Explained

Most hospital offer both the traditional and the new joint replacement procedures.

This doesn't help explain why patients choose traditional surgery over minimally invasive surgery. Just because both options are available doesn't tell us anything about why patients would prefer one over the other when seeking faster recovery.

With longer recovery times there is an increased risk of complications such as blood clots and infections

This actually makes the puzzle worse, not better. If longer recovery times increase complications, then we'd expect patients to want the minimally invasive surgery with shorter recovery times even more strongly. This doesn't explain why they choose traditional surgery.

The cost of postoperative hospital stays following traditional joint replacement surgery can be as high as the cost of the operation itself

This information about cost doesn't resolve our paradox about recovery time. The passage already told us that minimally invasive surgery often results in lower total bills through shorter hospital stays, so this reinforces that advantage without explaining why recovery-focused patients still choose traditional surgery.

Patients who have undergone minimally invasive procedures use less pain medication than do those who have undergone traditional procedures

This is another advantage for minimally invasive surgery that makes our paradox even more puzzling. If patients use less pain medication with the new procedure, we'd expect even more patients to choose it, not fewer.

The patients know that surgeons who have extensive experience performing a procedure are much less likely to make errors that can be corrected only with extensive physical therapy

This perfectly explains our paradox! Traditional surgery has been around much longer, so surgeons have extensive experience with it. Minimally invasive surgery is newer, so surgeons have less experience. Even though the new procedure might theoretically offer faster recovery, patients wanting the best chance of minimizing recovery time would choose the surgery where experienced surgeons are less likely to make mistakes that require extensive physical therapy to correct. This resolves the contradiction completely.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...