Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2022 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

A Study and Analysis of Cesarean Sections by Robson's Ten Group Classification System

Prasad Deshmukh, Shruti A Panchbudhe, Aditya R Nimbkar

Keywords : Cesarean section, Instrumental delivery, Robson's criteria, Trial of labor

Citation Information : 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):370-373.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-2084

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 22-08-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: The hitherto rising rate of cesarean sections is affecting women's obstetric careers by its inherent operative complications and on the other hand, the fetal complications arising from morbid trials of labor has its own medicolegal repercussions. In this scenario, Robson's Ten Group Classification System (TGCS) provides a comprehensive and conclusive system for classifying indications of cesarean sections and helps to curb down rates of cesarean sections. Methodology: The present study was conducted by retrospective data collection in a tertiary care center from January 2019 to December 2019. The study center is a major teaching hospital in Mumbai, which is also a referral center for all peripheral hospitals as well. Result: The rate of cesarean sections in our institute is 44.24%. The rate of cesarean sections (CS) is undoubtedly high. This is attributable to high-risk women coming into labor, and the condition in which these women come warrants the doctor to proceed for CS directly for maternal and fetal salvage. Conclusion: The major focus to bring down CS rates should be to reduce primary CS rates by encouraging good and ethical trials of labor. Encouraging instrumental vaginal delivery, whenever not contraindicated, also will bring down CS rates. Clinical significance: This study helps us understand the lost art of vaginal delivery and rising rates of poorly indicated cesarean sections and the type of indications for which cesarean sections are performed. It helps us introspect and improvise our clinical judgment on this topic.


PDF Share
  1. van Roosmalen J, van der Does CD. Cesarean birth rates worldwide. A search for determinants. Trop Geogr Med 1995;47(1):19–22. PMID: 7747325.
  2. World Health Organization. Monitoring Emergency Obstetric Care: A Handbook. Geneva, Switzerland; 2009.
  3. Althabe F, Belizán JM. Cesarean section: the paradox (comment). Lancet 2006;368(9546):1472–1473. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06) 69616-5.
  4. Stanton C, Ronsmans C, Baltimore Group on Cesarean. Recommendations for routine reporting on indications for cesarean delivery in developing countries. Birth 2008;35(3):204–211. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2008.00241.x.
  5. Robson M. Classification of cesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev 2001;12(1):23–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0965539501000122.
  6. Thomas J, Paranjothy S, The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. The National Sentinel Cesarean Section Audit Report. London; RCOG Press; 2001.
  7. Stavrou EP, Ford JB, Shand AW, et al. Epidemiology and trends for Cesarean section births in New South Wales, Australia: a population-based study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2011;11:8. DOI:10.1186/1471-2393.
  8. Laws PJ, Sullivan EA. Australia's Mothers and Babies 2007. Sydney; 2009.
  9. Kolås T, Hofoss D, Daltveit AK, et al. Indications for cesarean deliveries in Norway. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188(4):864–870. DOI: 10.1067/mob.2003.217.
  10. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gulmezoglu AM, et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. Lancet 2010;375(9713):490–499. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61870-5.
  11. MacDorman MF, Menacker F, Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol 2008;35(2):293–307. DOI: 10.1016/j.clp.2008.03.007.
  12. Yazdizadeh B, Nedjat S, Mohammad K, et al. Cesarean section rate in Iran, multidimensional approaches for behavioral change of providers: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 2011;11:159. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-159.
  13. Prameela RC, Shilpa G, Farha A, et al. 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 Feder Obst Gynae 2016;8(3):175–180. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-1412.
  14. Baser A, Sharma S, Kumar S, et al. Indication for cesarean section as per Robsons's criteria: an analysis of 5000 consecutive cesarean cases. J South Asian Feder Obst Gynae 2021;13(1):22–25. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-1861.
  15. Abhilasha Yadav, Rachna Agrawal, Romila Chawang K, et al. Analysis of cesarean section rate using Robson 10 Group Classification System in a Tertiary Hospital: an observational study. Global J Med Res 2022. ISSN 2249-4618. Available at: . Date accessed: 28 April 2022.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.