A study comparing the caesarean section rates in various groups of Robson classification in a tertiary care hospital and its comparison with the predicted rate by the World Health Organisation C-model

Authors

  • Pravallika G. Gummadi Department of Obstetrics and Gyanecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India
  • Jayaraman Nambiar Mavila Department of Obstetrics and Gyanecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2118-2769
  • Shripad Hebbar Department of Obstetrics and Gyanecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20262116

Keywords:

Labour, WHO C-section model, Robson's classification, Cesarean section

Abstract

Background: The incidence of cesarean section is increasing worldwide. The World Health Organisation (WHO) C-section model can be used to predict the incidence of cesarean section. The purpose of this study is to determine the incidence of cesarean section across various Robson groups and compare it with the WHO C-section model.

Methods: 683 women who delivered after 22 weeks of gestation were studied. WHO C Model predicted caesarean rates were studied in various Robsons group. The observed caesarean section rates in various groups were compared with the predicted caesarean section rates in various Robsons groups.

Results: We found high rates of caesarean section among various Robsons groups when compared with the predicted WHO C-model. Fetal distress and caesarean sections on maternal request were the commonest cause of caesarean section in our study.

Conclusions: We observed higher rates of section in our study when compared with the predicted WHO C model. Adhering to strict labour ward protocols and the use of sensitive methods of fetal monitoring, like fetal scalp pH, may reduce the number of sections.

References

Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2(8452):436-7.

Souza JP, Gülmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Carroli G, Fawole B, et al; WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health Research Group. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health. BMC Med. 2010;8:71.

Souza JP, Betran AP, Dumont A, de Mucio B, Gibbs Pickens CM, Deneux-Tharaux C, et al. A global reference for caesarean section rates (C-Model): a multicountry cross-sectional study. BJOG. 2016;123(3):427-36.

Robson Classification: Implementation Manual. Geneva: World Health Organisation, 2017; Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Available at: https: //www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241513197. Accessed on 17 March 2026.

Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev. 2001;12:23-39.

Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343.

Abdel-Aleem H, Darwish A, Abdelaleem AA, Mansur M. Usefulness of the WHO C-Model to optimize the cesarean delivery rate in a tertiary hospital setting. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;137(1):40-4.

National Center for Health Statistics. User Guide to the 2010 Natality Public Use File. Hyatts-ville, Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics. Annual product. 2012. Available at: http://www. cdc.gov/nchs/dataaccess/VitalStatsOnline.htm. Accessed on 14 March 2026.

Souza JP, Gülmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Carroli G, Fawole B, et al; WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health Research Group. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health. BMC Med. 2010;8:71.

Blondel B, Lelong N, Kermarrec M, Goffinet F; National Coordination Group of the National Perinatal Surveys. Trends in perinatal health in France from 1995 to 2010. Results from the French National Perinatal Surveys. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2012;41(4):e1-15.

Robson M, Murphy M, Byrne F. Quality assurance: The 10-Group Classification System (Robson classification), induction of labor, and cesarean delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;131:S23-7.

Robson M, Hartigan L, Murphy M. Methods of achieving and maintaining an appropriate caesarean section rate. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27(2):297-308.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-26

How to Cite

Gummadi, P. G., Mavila, J. N., & Hebbar, S. (2026). A study comparing the caesarean section rates in various groups of Robson classification in a tertiary care hospital and its comparison with the predicted rate by the World Health Organisation C-model . International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 15(7), 2640–2644. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20262116

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles