ANALYSIS OF CESAREAN SECTIONS USING ROBSON’S 10 GROUP CLASSIFICATION: NEED OF THE HOUR
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2024v17i8.51196Keywords:
Caesarean section, Robson's classification, auditAbstract
Objective: The number of women delivering by cesarean sections has increased exponentially over the past decade hence making its reanalysis of absolute importance. Delving into the indications and rationale of this surgery is crucial. An audit of the cesarean sections performed in a Post- Graduate teaching institute with the use of Robson’s classification.
Methods: A retrospective study was carried out for 4 years in PGI YCMH, Pimpri from January 2018 to December 2021, where details of women delivered by the cesarean section were collected. The indications for cesarean section were sorted as stated by Robson’s classification and the results were analyzed.
Results: The cesarean section rate in the hospital during the study duration was 35.22%. The highest contribution to the study population was from group 2 (23.4%) and then from group 1 (18.1%) and 3 (17.5%). The lowest representations were from groups 9 (0.43%) and 8 (1.01%). Group 5 had the greatest contribution to the total cesarean section rate (44.57%) closely followed by group 2 (19.98). Group 9 had a 100% cesarean section rate even though it was only 0.43% of the population.
Conclusion: An audit of the cesarean section as an important intervention is needed and Robson’s classification should be utilized in all maternity care. This will help in triaging the indications, give insights into important indications, and provide a glimpse of the burden of the intervention. This will help us to reduce unwanted cesarean sections. Robson’s classification can be of great help in it; however, it has some limitations which need to be looked at.
Downloads
References
Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev. 2001;12(1):23-39. doi: 10.1017/S0965539501000122
Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001 Feb;15(1):179-94. doi: 10.1053/ beog.2000.0156, PMID 11359322
Althabe F, Belizán JM. Caesarean section: The paradox. Lancet. 2006 Oct 28;368(9546):1472-3. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69616-5, PMID 17071266
Villar J, Carroli G, Zavaleta N, Donner A, Wojdyla D, Faundes A, et al. Maternal and neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery: Multicentre prospective study. BMJ. 2007 Nov 15;335(7628):1025. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39363.706956.55, PMID 17977819
Cheesman K, Brady JE, Flood P, Li G. Epidemiology of anesthesia-related complications in labor and delivery, New York State, 2002- 2005. Anesth Analg. 2009 Oct;109(4):1174-81. doi: 10.1213/ ane.0b013e3181b2ef75, PMID 19762746
Yadav RG, Maitra N. Examining cesarean delivery rates using the Robson’s ten-group classification. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2016 Oct;66(Suppl 1):1-6. doi: 10.1007/s13224-015-0738-1, PMID 27651569
Prameela R, Shilpa G, Farha A, Prajwal S. Analysis of cesarean section rate using Robson’s ten group classification system and comparing the trend at a tertiary hospital for 2 years. J South Asian Fed Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Sep;8(3):175-80. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-1412
Gilani S, Mazhar SB, Zafar M, Mazhar T. The modified Robson criteria for caesarean section audit at mother and child health center Pakistan Institute of medical sciences Islamabad. JPMA J Pak Med Assoc. 2020 Feb;70(2):299-303. doi: 10.5455/JPMA.293708, PMID 32063624
Vogel JP, Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in 21 countries: A secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2015 May 1;3(5):e260-70. doi: 10.1016/ S2214-109X(15)70094-X, PMID 25866355
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(4):963-8. doi: 10.5455/2320-1770. ijrcog20141217
Patel RV, Gosalia EV, Deliwala 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(3):575-80. doi: 10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20140927
Reddy AY, Dalal A, Khursheed R. Robson ten group classification system for analysis of Cesarean sections in an Indian hospital. Res J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul 2;11(1):1-8. doi: 10.3923/rjog.2018.1.8
Dhodapkar SB, Bhairavi S, Daniel M, Chauhan NS, Chauhan RC. Analysis of caesarean sections according to Robson’s ten group classification system at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2015;4(3):745-9. doi: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20150085
Jogia PD, Lodhiya KK. Analysis of caesarean sections according to modified Robson’s ten group classification system at a tertiary care centre in Western India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan 25;8(2):433-9. doi: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20190264
Wanjari SA. Rising caesarean section rate: A matter of concern? Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014;3(3):728-31. doi: 10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20140979
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2024 Rohit Shantilal Dimbar, Dr. Mangal Santosh Supe, Dr. Smita Marotirao Thakkarwad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The publication is licensed under CC By and is open access. Copyright is with author and allowed to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
