Classification of births according to Robson 10 group classification: an emerging concept to audit the increasing caesarean section rate

Priyanka Kolusu, Palutla Himabindu


Background: High caesarean birth rates are an issue of international public health concern. Worries over such increases have led the WHO to advice that caesarean section rate should not be more than 15%. WHO proposes that the health care facilities to use the Robson’s 10 group classification system to audit their CS rates. Our aim was to investigate the CS rates in a period of 6 months using Robso’s 10 group classification.

Methods: This was a cross sectional study conducted for a period of 6 months from July 2018 to December 2018 in Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Siddhartha medical college which is a tertiary care center .All women delivered during this period in labour ward were included. All relevant obstetric information (parity, mode of previous deliveries, previous CS and indications, gestational age, onset of labor) was entered on a questionnaire and classified into Robson’s 10 classes and percentages were calculated.

Results: Total number of deliveries in 6 months is 4719 out of which C-sections are 1816 which accounts for 38.48%. Highest contribution was by group 5 and group 2. Together these two groups contribute to 62.4% of the total caesarean sections. Group 6 and group 9 by themselves did not contribute much but within their groups had 100% C-section rates.

Conclusions: Robson’s 10 group classification provides easy way in collecting information about caesarean section rate which obtains good insight into certain birth groups. Number of women who attempt VBAC has declined over recent years due to fear of uterine rupture. Reducing primary C-section rates, adequate counseling and changing norms for non-reassuring fetal status could reduce contribution of Robson’s groups towards absolute C-section rates.


Caesarean section, Deliveries, Labour, Robson’s classification, Robsons groups, VBAC

Full Text:



Robson Classification Implementation Manual, Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA-3.0 IGO.

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;7:1796-800.

World Health Organization. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. WHO 2015 WHO_RHR_15.02_eng.pdf;jsessionid = 616E7201DF2520A59D2D0A80438943F2.

Althabe F, Sosa C, Beliza ´n JM, Gibbons L, Jacquerioz F, Bergel E. Cesarean section rates and maternal and neonatal mortality in low-, medium-, and high-income countries: an ecological study. Birth. 2006; 33(4):270–7. PMID: 17150064.

Molina G, Weiser TG, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, Uribe-Leitz T, Azad T, et al. Relationship between cesarean delivery rate and maternal and neonatal mortality. Jama. 2015; 314(21):2263–70. https://doi. org/10.1001/jama.2015.15553 PMID: 26624825.

Betra ´n AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Zhang J, Gu ¨lmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PloS one. 2016; 11(2):e0148343.

Kazmi T, Saiseema S, Khan S. Analysis of Cesarean Section Rate - According to Robson's 10-group Classification. Oman Med J. 2012;27(5):415-417.

Horton R, Das P. Indian health: The path from crisis to progress the Lancet. 2011;377:181-3.

Kapil U, Choudhury P. National Rural Health Mission (NRHM): Will it make a Difference? Indian Pediatrics; 2005;42:783.

Ray A, Vadvagi N. Assessment and comparison of Caesarean section rates to WHO recommendations Authors. The Online Journal of Clinical Audits. 2015;7(4):1-8.

Hofmeyr GJ, Kulier R, West HM. External cephalic version for breech presentation at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;4:Cd000083.