DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20191974

Changing trends of cesarean section using Robson’s Ten-group classification in tertiary centre: a retrospective study

Anamika Singh, Sadiqunnisa .

Abstract


Background: The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the CS rates at a tertiary care medical college setting centre which has a high referral rate of complicated pregnancies and make analysis based on the 10-group classification.

Methods: This is a retrospective study carried out department obstetrics and gynecology of a tertiary care medical college hospital in Mangalore and includes all deliveries over a period of five years from Jan 14 to Dec 2018 and it was compared with the c-section from January 2007 to December 2011.

Results: The overall CS (cesarean section) during the period 2014-18 was 31.85 which were significantly greater then 2007-11 period (20.59%). The main contributing groups to the overall CS rate were the previous CS (Group 5) and Primigravida groups, (Groups 1 and 2) 80%.

Conclusions: It is important that efforts to reduce the overall CS rate should focus on reducing the primary CS rate. The application of Robson’s Ten-group classification (TGCS) in centre has helped to identify the main groups of subjects who had the overall maximum CSR.


Keywords


Caesarean rate, Robson’s Ten-group classification

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ye J, Betrán AP, Guerrero Vela M, Souza JP, Zhang J. Searching for the optimal rate of medically necessary caesarean delivery. Birth. 2014;41(3):237-44.

Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A. Unforeseen consequences of the increasing rate of caesarean deliveries: early placenta accreta and caesarean scar pregnancy. A review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(1):14-29.

Gregory KD, Jackson S, Korst L, Fridman M. Caesarean versus vaginal delivery: whose risks? Whose benefits? Am J Perinatol. 2012;29(1):7-18.

WHO. Monitoring obstetric care: a handbook. Geneva: WHO Press, World Health Organization. 2009.

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

World Health Organization. Monitoring emergency obstetric care: a handbook. Geneva, Switzerland. 2009.

World Health Organization Human Reproduction Programme, 10 April 2015. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. Reprod Health Matters. 2015;23:149-50.

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(1):e14566.

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

Brennan DJ, Robson MS, Murphy M, O'Herlihy C. Comparative analysis of international caesarean delivery rates using 10-group classification identifies significant variation in spontaneous labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(308):e301-8.

Thomas J, Paranjothy S and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, clinical effectiveness support unit. The national sentinel caesarean section audit report. London; RCOG press, 2001.

Qazi M, Saqib N. Rising trend of caesarean section in a tertiary hospital over half decade: a retrospective study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018;7:4097-102.

Anderson GM, Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing caesarean birth rate. N Eng J Med. 1984;311;87-892.

Brennan DJ, Robson MS, Murphy M, O'Herlihy C. Comparative analysis of international caesarean delivery rates using 10-group classification identifies significant variation in spontaneous labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(308):e301-8.

Stavrou EP, Ford JB, Shand AW, Morris JM, Roberts CL. Epidemiology and trends for Caesarean section births in New South Wales, Australia: a population-based study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2011;11:8.

The National Maternity Hospital Dublin. Ireland. Annual Clinical Report. Dublin; The National Maternity Hospital. 2000;98-100.