CESAREAN AUDIT: USING ROBSON’S 10 GROUP CLASSIFICATION AT C. U. SHAH MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL

Authors

  • HIMANI MAL Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, C.U. Shah Medical College and Hospital, Surendranagar, Gujarat, India
  • HARSHDEEP K JADEJA Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, C.U. Shah Medical College and Hospital, Surendranagar, Gujarat, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3815-8503
  • BHAVESH B AIRAO Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, C.U. Shah Medical College and Hospital, Surendranagar, Gujarat, India. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1913-4442

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2024v17i10.51803

Keywords:

Cesarean delivery, Robson classification, CS rate, Trial of labor

Abstract

Objective: The World Health Organization (WHO) has expressed concern over the rising cesarean section (CS) rate, particularly in middle-and high- income countries. The reasons behind this increase are still debated, but the WHO declared that there is no justification for a rate higher than 10–15%. The Robson classification system, advocated by WHO and FIGO, can help assess and compare CS rates.

 Study Design and Methods: The Gynecology Department at C.U. Shah Medical College and Hospital conducted an observational study on pregnant patients hospitalized for labor pain between January 2020 and December 2022, with a focus on CS patients. The study used Robson’s 10-group categorization technique to extract maternal features and categorize cesarean performances.

Results: Between January 2020 and December 2022, C. U. Shah Medical College and Hospital delivered 4967 patients, of whom 1,572 underwent a CS section. 46.3% were nulliparous, and 53.7% were multipara. 78.31% of patients arrived at full term, with 98.8% having single conceptions. 94.8% of the cases had a cephalic presentation, 4.4% had a breech presentation, and 0.81% had a transverse position.

Conclusions: Robson classification is a useful technique for analyzing cesarean delivery (CS) rates, aiding in identifying corrective methods to reduce burden on healthcare systems, and promoting accurate labor monitoring, fetal scalp electrodes, and prenatal education.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Tura AK, Pijpers O, de Man M, Cleveringa M, Koopmans I, Gure T, et al. 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:e020520. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020520.

Adewuyi EO, Auta A, Khanal V, Tapshak SJ, Zhao Y. Cesarean delivery in Nigeria: prevalence and

associated factors―a population-based cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e027273.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027273.

Akadri AA, Odelola OI. A six year review of caesarean section at Olabisi Onabanjo University

Teaching Hospital Sagamu, south west Nigeria. Nigerian Medical Practitioner 2017; 71 (3–4): 53 – 7

Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Zhang J, Gülmezoğlu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing Trend in cesarean

section rates: Global, Regional and National estimates: 1990–2014. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(2):e0148343.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148343.

Zwecker P, Azoulay L, Abenhaim HA. Effect of fear of litigation on obstetric care: a nationwide

analysis on obstetric practice. Am J Perinatol. 2011; 28(4):277–84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-

WHO (1985) Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 2: 436–437.

Robson MS (2001) Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review 12: 23–

Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP, Widmer M, Allen T, Metin G, et al. Classifications for caesarean

section: a systematic review. PLoSONE 2011:6(1):e14566.

Betrán AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, Gülmezoğlu AM, WHO Working Group on Caesarean Section. WHO

statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG. 2016;123(5):667–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-

13526.

FIGO Working group on challenges in. Care of mothers and infants during labour and delivery. Best

practice advice on the 10-group classification system for cesarean deliveries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet.

;135:232–3.

WHO recommendations non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections. Geneva:

World Health Organization. 2018. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550338

Shruti Bhavi Patil,Rajitha D.Robson classification: beyond caesarean rates.International Journal of

Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2023 july ;12(7):2241-2246.

Dr. Preeti Punatar, Dr. Bhakti Pattani.Analysis of casearean section Rates Based on ROBSON

Classification System in a Tertiary Care Hospital in West Coast of Gujarat, India. International Journal

of Innovative Research in Medical Science (IJIRMS) 2023 April;8(4): 160-164

Dolly Chavda,Kamal Goswam,Kavita Dudhrejiya. A cross sectional study of 1000 lower segment

cesarean section in obstetrics and gynecology department of P. D. U Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat,

India.International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology.2017 april

;6(4):1186-1191

Deshmukh P, Panchbudhe SA, Nimbkar AR. A study and analysis of cesarean sections by Robson's ten

group classification system. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae. 2022;14 (4):370-3.

Published

07-10-2024

How to Cite

HIMANI MAL, HARSHDEEP K JADEJA, and BHAVESH B AIRAO. “CESAREAN AUDIT: USING ROBSON’S 10 GROUP CLASSIFICATION AT C. U. SHAH MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL”. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, vol. 17, no. 10, Oct. 2024, pp. 130-4, doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2024v17i10.51803.

Issue

Section

Original Article(s)