Robson classification: beyond caesarean rates

Authors

  • Shruti Bhavi Patil Department of Obstertrics and Gynaecology, Gadag Institute of Medical Sciences, Gadag, Karnataka, India
  • Rajitha D. Department of Obstertrics and Gynaecology, Gadag Institute of Medical Sciences, Gadag, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20231941

Keywords:

Caesarean section, Outcome, Robson’s classification

Abstract

Background: Caesarean rates are increasing globally. Unnecessary caesarean sections are a public health concern and are associated with both short term and long-term risks. Robson’s ten group classification is the accepted classification for caesarean section and implementing it is an effective measure in understanding which group should be focussed to reduce the caesarean section rates. The classification can be used as a framework for assessing perinatal and maternal outcome.

Methods: All the deliveries with gestational age more than 28 weeks at Gadag Institute of medical sciences, Karnataka, during April 2022 were included. Obstetric characteristics like parity, gestational age, previous caesarean sections, onset of labour, lie, presentation, mode of delivery, indications for caesarean section and foetal and maternal complications were recorded.

Results: The caesarean rate was 57.9%. Groups 5, 1 and 2 were the major contributors. Previous LSCS was the most common indication 46%. In groups 1 to 4 foetal distress was the most common indication. The overall proportion of unfavourable foetal outcome among all deliveries was 17.7% caesarean deliveries (20.1%), vaginal deliveries 14.5%. The proportion of unfavourable maternal outcome was 1.6%; 8 women delivered by CS (2.5%) and 1 woman by vaginal delivery (0.4%).

Conclusions: Caesarean section should be used appropriately and increase in caesarean section does not ensure favourable maternal or perinatal outcome.

References

Mylonas I, Friese K. Indications for and risk of elective caesarean section. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112(29-30):489-95.

Stjernholm YV, Petersson K, Eneroth E. Changed indications for cesarean sections. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89(1):49-53.

Parveen R, Khakwani M, Naz A, Bhatti R. Analysis of cesarean sections using Robson’s ten group classification system. Pak J Med Sci. 2021;37(2):1-5.

Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Heal. 2021;6(6):e005671.

Abubeker FA, Gashawbeza B, Gebre TM, Wondafrash M, Teklu AM, Degu D, et al. Analysis of cesarean section rates using Robson ten group classification system in a tertiary teaching hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. BMC Preg Childb. 2020;20(1):1-7.

Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP, Widmer M, Allen T, Metin G, et al. Classifications for caesarean section: a systematic review. PLoSONE 2011:6(1):e14566.

Robson Classification: Implementation Manual. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/978197. Accessed on 21 January 2023.

Kant A, Mendiratta S. Classification of cesarean section through Robson criteria: an emerging concept to audit the increasing cesarean section rate. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018;7(11):4674-7.

Gomathy E, Radhika K, Kondareddy T. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in tertiary hospital. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2018;7(5):1796-1800.

Varija T, Kumar VCM, Tarihalli C. Analysis of caesarean section rate in tertiary care hospital according to Robson`s 10 groups classification. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018;7(4):1380-4.

Reddy AY, Dalal A, Khursheed R. Robson ten group classification system for analysis of cesarean sections in an Indian hospital. Res J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;11(1):1-8.

Dhodapkar SB, Bhairavi S, Daniel M, Chauhan NS, Chauhan RC. Analysis of caesarean sections according to Robson’s ten group classification system at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2015;4(3):745-9.

Sah S, Goel R, Goel JK. Fetal Analysis of caesarean section rate according to Robson’s criteria in tertiary care centre. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018;7(8):3060-4.

Konar H, Sarkar M, Chowdhury SK. Analysis of caesarean section rates using the robson ten-group classification at a tertiary care teaching hospital in eastern India: a cross-sectional study. JCDR 2021;15(3):24-8.

Shenoy HT, Shenoy ST, Anaswara T, Remash K. Analysis of caesarean delivery using Robson ten group classification system at a tertiary care teaching institute in Kerala, India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2019;8(5):1990-8.

Wahane A, Ghaisas AS. Analysis of caesarean sections according to Robson’s criteria at a tertiary care teaching hospital in central India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2020;9(10):4221-6.

Deshmukh P, Panchbudhe SA, Nimbkar AR. A study and analysis of cesarean sections by Robson's ten group classification system. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae. 2022;14 (4):370-3.

Murugesan K, Rengaraj S. Analysis of cesarean section using Robson’s ten group classification system in a tertiary care center from Southern India: A crosssectional study. Int J Adv Med Health Res. 2021;8(2):75-82.

Tognon F, Borghero A, Putoto G, Maziku D, Torelli GF, Azzimonti G, et al. Analysis of caesarean section and neonatal outcome using the Robson classification in a rural district hospital in Tanzania: an observational retrospective study. BMJ open. 2019;9(12):e033348.

Mengesha MB, Adhanu HH, Weldegeorges DA, Assefa NE, Werid WM, Weldemariam MG, et al. Maternal and fetal outcomes of cesarean delivery and factors associated with its unfavorable management outcomes; in Ayder Specialized Comprehensive Hospital, Mekelle, Tigray, Ethiopia, 2017. BMC Res Notes. 2019;12(1):650.

Downloads

Published

2023-06-28

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles