DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20180891

Retrospective study of cesarean section by using the Robson’s ten group classification system

Manoj Bhatt, Gunvant Kadikar, Dipti C. Parmar, Medha Kanani

Abstract


Background: The present study was done to determine the relative contribution of each of ten groups of robson´s classification to overall cesarean section rate and identify modifiable group for intervention to reduce the cesarean rate.

Methods: Retrospective review of record of cesarean section from the statistical Dept of Obstetrics and Gynecology sir T. hospital, Bhavnagar from January 2017 to October 2017 and classify them in to Robson´s ten group classification system to find out total number of cesarean among total number of delivery in above 10 months duration.

Results: Total number of delivery in my study institute in 10 months was 3804 out of them 1182 was cesarean section, so the overall cesarean section rate in Sir T. hospital, Bhavnagar was 31%. Group 1 (Nulliparous, single cephalic, >37 weeks in spontaneous labor), 2 (Nulliparous, single cephalic, >37 weeks, induced or CS before labor) and 5 (Previous CS, single cephalic, >37 weeks) contributes for around 66% of total cesarean. Group 5 (Previous CS, single cephalic, >37 weeks) was the major contributor among all. Least common cause of cesarean was group 8 (All multiple pregnancies (including previous CS)) and group 9 (All abnormal lies including previous CS).

Conclusions: Incidence of cesarean was more common with patient having previous cesarean section. So, to decrease cesarean rate trial of labour should be given to the patient who was suitable for vaginal birth after cesarean section. Adequate assessment of pelvis and giving trial to patient having borderline pelvis also decrease the rate of cesarean in primi gravid (group 1).


Keywords


Cesarean section, Previous CS, Robson’s classification system, Retrospective study

Full Text:

PDF

References


Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, Bing-shun W, Thomas J, Van Look P, et al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global and regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21:98-114.

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

Tapia V, Betran AP, Gonzales GF. Caesarean section in peru: analysis of trends using the Robson classification system. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0148138.

Gonzales GF, Tapia VL, Fort AL, Betran AP. Pregnancy outcomes associated with Cesarean deliveries in Peruvian public health facilities. Int J Women’s Health. 2013;5:637-45.

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.

Boutsikou T, Malamitsi-Puchner A. Caesarean section: impact on mother and child. Acta Paediatr. 2011;100:1518-22.

Grytten J, Monkerud L, Hagen TP, Sørensen R, Eskild A, Skau I. The impact of hospital revenue on the increase in caesarean sections in Norway. A panel data analysis of hospitals 1976-2005. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11:267.

Gibbons L, Belizan JM, Lauer JA, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:331.

Ecker JL, Frigoletto FD. Cesarean delivery and the risk-benefit calculus. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:885-8.

Fuglenes D, Øian P, Kristiansen IS. Obstetricians’ choice of cesarean delivery in ambiguous cases: is it influenced by risk attitude or fear of complaints and litigation? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:e1-e8.

WHO. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;24: 4360-4370.

Department of Health and Human Services; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Center for Health Statistics. Healthy People 2000: national health promotion and disease prevention objectives: Full report, with commentary (DHHS publication no.(PHS) 91-50212). Washington: Government Printing Office.

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

Farine D, Shepherd D Classification of caesarean sections in canada: the Modified Robson Criteria. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2012;34:976-9.

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

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: Deciding on a trial of labor after cesarean delivery.

Kwast BE, Lennox CE, Farley TM, Olayinka I. World health organization partograph in management of labour. Lancet. 1994;343(8910):1399-1404.

Alarab M, Regan C, O'connell MP, Keane DP, O'herlihy C, Foley ME. Singleton vaginal breech delivery at term: still a safe option. Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Mar;103(3):407-12.