单选题   Everyone arriving at a hospital's emergency room (ER) wishes to be seen quickly, but for stroke patients it can be a matter of life or death. The most common stroke involves a blood clot blocking vessels in the brain, killing brain cells nearby almost immediately. Luckily, an effective treatment exists. Thrombolytic therapy uses drugs to dissolve the clot and restore the flow of blood. If started within a couple of hours of a stroke occurring, it can limit brain damage and reduce long-term disability. Neurologists even have a catchphrase for this: 'time is brain'.
    Understandably, hospitals strive to identify stroke cases and administer such medication without delay. A key step is using a computed tomography (CT) scanner to ensure that there has been no bleeding in the brain, in which case thrombolytic drugs would make things worse. The last couple of decades have seen many innovations in reducing this 'time to CT'.
    But in shaving seconds from medical procedures, researchers may have neglected something more important: the human element. Gal Ifergane, a neurologist at Soroka University Medical Centre in southern Israel, noticed that stroke patients who were accompanied to the ER by Mends or family seemed to fare better than those who arrived alone. So for 15 months, ER staff at Soroka recorded the number of companions escorting each stroke sufferer, over 700 in all, and tracked their progress.
    The results, recently published in Medicine, tell a striking story. Stroke victims arriving with someone were more than twice as likely to be correctly diagnosed by the triage nurse, and had their CT scans performed earlier. Patients eligible for clot-busting medication also received it much faster if accompanied, although their numbers were too few for the researchers to be sure it was because they had company. The differences were far from trivial. Patients with one companion had CT scans an average of 15 minutes sooner than those unaccompanied. A second companion shaved a farther 20 minutes off the wait, although three or more companions did not confer any additional benefit.
    Dr. Ifergane did not record who the companions were, however, or how they were able to reduce delays. He believes that it is probably a combination of focusing the attention of clinical staff on their loved ones, and providing basic care such as helping to move patients into bed.
    Dr. Ifergane admits that his study has limitations. The sample size was rather small and his findings may reflect cultural norms in Israel that do not apply elsewhere. But he has already tried to make changes in the way the Soroka University Medical Centre operates. 'We asked our security team to allow two people to come in with stroke patients rather than just one,' he says. 'And we now consider stroke patients who are coming alone as a group at risk.'
    Dr. Ifergane also recommends that ERs provide a friendly 'stroke liaison' to accompany lone patients during the diagnostic and treatment processes. Something other hospitals might think about, too.
单选题     What does the author mean by 'time is brain'?______
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】由题干中的“time is brain”定位到首段最后两句。 语义理解题。定位句指出，如果在中风发生后的几个小时之内开始治疗，就可以将脑部损伤控制在一定程度并减少长期伤残，神经科医生因此才说“时间就是大脑”。由此可见，这句话是指，中风需要在最短的时间内进行治疗，故答案为D。 A“时间几乎与大脑一样珍贵”，文中并没有将时间和大脑进行比较，故排除；B“脑部损伤应该能很快得到修复”，本段倒数第二句提到的是尽量减少脑部损伤，并未提及修复的问题，故排除；C“医生需要时间研究脑部”，本段都是围绕中风治疗展开的，不涉及研究问题，C与文意不符，故排除。
单选题     Which of the following statements is true about 'time to CT'?______
 
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】由题干中的“time to CT”定位到第二段最后两句。 推理判断题。定位句指出，CT是确诊中风情况的关键，人们一直在努力减少“time to CT”，再结合首段中提到的时间对于中风病人来说会产生生死间的差别可知，这个等待CT检查的时间对于中风病人的生命来说意义重大，故答案为B。 A“它能帮助做出准确的诊断”，对诊断正误起关键性作用的是CT检查，而不是等待CT检查的时间，A错误，故排除；C“它可以简化治疗程序”，等待CT检查是治疗程序的一个环节，本身不能简化程序，故排除；D“它经常被研究者忽视”，本段最后一句提到，人们一首在努力缩短这个环节，可见，其没有被忽视，故排除。
单选题     What is Dr. Ifergane's finding about the human element?______
 
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】根据题干中的Dr. Ifergane's和human element定位到第三段第二句和第四段最后一句。 推理判断题。第一个定位句首先明确了所谓人为因素对于伊孚格恩医生而言是指就医的陪同，而第二个定位句指出两名陪同比一名陪同能再缩短20分钟等待就医的时间，而更多的陪同就不会带来进一步的优势。可见，两名陪同的优势是最大的，故答案为C。 A“医务人员给予有陪同的病人一些优先权”，在第五段中作者指出陪同可能帮助引起医务人员的注意，但这不能说明医务人员给予其优先权，故排除；B“由于有人陪同，病人能更快地接受血栓崩解治疗”，第四段第三句虽提到有人陪同的病人能更快地接受治疗，但又补充说道，由于样本太少，不能确定提早治疗的原因是否在于有人陪同，故该项可以排除；D“陪同人员可部分替代医务人员的工作”，第五段最后一句虽然提到陪同人员参与了一些基本的护理工作，但并没有说可以部分替代医务人员，故排除。
单选题     Dr. Ifergane has made a suggestion that ______
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】由题干中的suggestion定位到文章最后一段第一句。 事实细节题。定位句指出，伊孚格恩医生建议急诊室为单独就诊的病人在其诊断和治疗期间提供一名友好的“中风联系人”，再结合前文他对中风病人陪同人员重要性的强调可知，他建议一定要确保中风病人得到适当的陪同，故答案为D。 A“医务人员应该记录陪同人员的身份”，第五段第一句提到伊孚格恩医生的研究没有记录陪同人员的身份，也没有提到他建议记录其身份，故可排除；B“应该鼓励陪同人员提供基本的护理”，文章虽提到陪同人员参与了一些基本的护理工作，但并没有说伊孚格恩医生建议这样做，故排除；C“应该改变医疗机构的运作模式”，第六段提到伊孚格恩医生改变自己所在医院的部分运作方式，但由于他承认自己的研究可能存在地域局限性，故并未建议所有医疗机构都这样做，故可排除。
单选题     What does the author think of Dr. Ifergane's study?______
 
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】由题干可知本题为观点态度题，需从全文出发进行解答。 观点态度题。第四段第一句提到，伊孚格恩医生的研究揭示了一个惊人的事实，而最后一段第一句提到，伊孚格恩医生推荐急诊室为单独就诊的病人在其诊断和治疗期间提供一名友好的“中风联系人”，接下来作者建议其他医院考虑推行此项研究带来的一些改变。可见，在作者看来，这个研究具有重要的启示性，故答案为A。 B“它会开启医疗机构的重要改革”，作者只是建议其他医疗机构参考试行，并没有说会开启重要改革，故可排除；C“他对以色列以外的医院没有什么意义”，尽管在第六段提到这个研究可能存在地域局限性，但全文最后一句指出其研究发现的某些启示还是可以作为其他医院的参考的，故可排除；D“它的可信度应受到质疑”，尽管研究有局限性，但作者并没有质疑研究可信度的意思，故可排除。