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

Saroj Saharan, Radha Rastogi, Deepti Chyaunal


Background: The objective of this study was categorization and evaluation of the caesarean section rate at our institute as per Robson’s formula.

Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at department of obstetrics and gynecology, RNT Medical college, Udaipur, a tertiary care teaching hospital in South Rajasthan. The data was collected retrospectively from December 2020 to February 2020 over a period of 2 months and percentage were calculated in various groups as per Robson’s ten group classification system.

Results: Among a total of 1195 women delivered during study period, 420 (35.14%) delivered by CS. Women with previous CS (group 5) contributed maximum (35.95%) to the total number of CS followed by group 2 (27.14%).

Conclusions: Standardization of indication of caesarean deliveries, regular audits and definite protocol in hospitals will aid in curbing the rate of caesarean deliveries in hospitals.




Caesarean section, Robson’s classification

Full Text:



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

Aithabe F, Belizan JM. Caesarean section: the paradox (comment). Lancet. 2006;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(1):e14566.

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

Patel RV, Gosalia EV, KJ, Vasa PB, Pandya VM. Indication and trends of caesarean birth delivery in current practice scenario. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014;3(5):75-80.

Katke RD, Zarariya AN, Deai PV. LSCS audit in a tertiary care centre in Mumbai; to study indications and risk factors in LSCS and its effect on early perinatal morbidity and mortality rate. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014;3:963-8.

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

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

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

Bolognani CV, Reis LB, Dias A, Calderon ID. Robson 10-groups classification system to access C-section in two public hospitals of the Federal District/Brazil. PloS One. 2018;13(2):e0192997.

Littorp H, Kidanto HL, Nystrom L. increasing caesarean section rates among low risk groups: a panel study classifying deliveries according to Robson at a university hospital in Tanzania. BMC Pregnanc Childbirth. 2013;13:2393.

Tura AK, Pijpers O, Man MD. Analysis of caesarean sections using Robson 10-group classification system in a university hospital in eastern Ethiopia: a cross sectional study. BMJ Open. 2018;8:1773-7.

Kelly S, Sprague A, Fell DB. Examining caesarean sections in Canada using the Robson classification system. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013;35:206-14.

Roberg S, Dube E, Blouin S. Reporting caesarean delivery in Quebec using the Robson classification system. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017;39:152-6.

Vogel JP, Betran AP, Vindevoghel N. Use of Robson classification to assess caesarean section rates in 21 countries: a secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(5):260-70.

Elimian A, Figueroa R, Teani N. Intraparteum assessment of fetal wellbeing: a comparison of scalp stimulation with scalp blood pH sampling. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(3):373-6.

Wingert A, Johnsonc C, Featherstone R, Sebastianski M, Hartling, Wilson RD. Adjunct clinical interventions that influence vaginal birth after caesarean rates: a systematic review. BMC Pregnanc Childbirth. 2018;18(1):452.