Published: 2017-02-08

Analysis of caesarean sections according to Robson’s ten group classification system at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India

Sneha Badwe Dhodapkar, Sindhu Bhairavi, Mary Daniel, Neelima Singh Chauhan, Ramesh Chand Chauhan


Background: The caesarean section (CS) delivery rate is steadily increasing worldwide, including India. Identifying the proportion of women in various categories as per Robson's ten group classification system and CS rate among them is important to bring down the increasing CS rate.

Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS), a tertiary care

teaching hospital in Puducherry, South India. The data was collected for the women delivered by CS during January 2011 to December 2011 and proportions in various groups as per Robson’s ten-group classification system were calculated.

Results: Among a total of 1123 women delivered during study period, 367 (32.6%) delivered by CS. The CS rates among various groups varied from 100% among women with breach presentation (group 6 and group 7) and abnormal lies (group 9) to 5.9% among multiparous women with spontaneous labour having single cephalic pregnancy (group 3). Among women with precious section, CS rate was very high (89.6%). Women with previous CS (group 5) contributed maximum (40.1%) to the total number of CS.

Conclusions: In the present study, all women with breech presentation and abnormal lies delivered by CS and repeat CS was the highest contributor to all CS deliveries.    


Robson’s ten group classification, Cesarean section

Full Text:



Kambo I, Bedi N, Dhillon BS, Saxena NC. A critical appraisal of cesarean section rates at teaching hospitals in India. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2002;79:151-8.

Dhillon BS, Chandhiok N, Bharti S, Bhatia P, Coyaji KJ, Das MC, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) versus emergency repeat cesarean section at teaching hospitals in India: an ICMR task force study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014;3:592-7.

World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;326(8452):436-7.

Althabe F, Belizán JM. Caesarean section: the paradox (comment). Lancet. 2006 Oct;368(9546):1472-3.

Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP, Widmer M, Allen T, Gulmezoglu M, et al. Classifications for cesarean section: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2011;6:e14566.

Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev. 2001;12(1):23-39.

Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;15(1):179-94.

Patel RV, Gosalia EV, KJ, Vasa PB, Pandya VM. Indications and trends of caesarean birth delivery in the current practice scenario. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014;3:575-80.

Katke RD, Zarariya AN, Desai PV. LSCS audit in a tertiary care center in Mumbai: to study indications and risk factors in LSCS and it’s effect on early peri-natal morbidity and mortality rate. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014;3:963-8.

Abdel-Aleem H, Shaaban OM, Hassanin Al, Ibraheem AA. Analysis of cesarean delivery at Assiut University Hospital using the Ten Group Classification System. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013 Nov;123(2):119-23.

Kansara V, Patel S, Aanand N, Muchhadia J, Kagathra B , Patel R. A recent way of evaluation of cesarean birth rate by Robson’s 10-group system. J Med Pharmaceut Allied Sci. 2014;01:62-70.

Shirsath A, Risbud N. Analysis of cesarean section rate according to Robson’s 10-group classification system at a tertiary care hospital. Int J Sci Res. 2014 Jan;3(1):401-2.

Kazmi T, Saiseema S, Khan S. Analysis of cesarean section rate according to Robson’s 10-group classification. Oman Med J. 2012 Sep;27(5):415-7.

Wanjari SA. Rising caesarean section rate: a matter of concern? Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014;3:728-31.