ANALYSIS OF CAESAREAN SECTIONS RATES USING ROBSON’S TEN GROUP CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM, UNIT B MCHC, ATH ABBOTTABAD

Authors

  • Sundus Ambreen Afridi PGT, Gynae B unit, ATH, Abbottabad
  • Khalid Ahmad Khyber Medical University
  • Ruqqiya Sultana Professor Gynae Unit A, ATH Abbottabad

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55519/JAMC-03-10986

Abstract

Background: There is growing international concern about the increased rate of caesarean sections (CS), Caesarean procedures performed in the absence of a clinical justification do not reduce maternal or infant death rates if carried out at a rate higher than 10%–15% Achieving reductions in maternal and infant morbidity and mortality are, among others, the objectives promoted by the World Health Organization (WHO) for 2030. The analysis of unjustified C/S rate is done by Using Robson’s Ten Group Classification system. Methods: Cross-sectional study by using Robson’s Ten Group classification, in Unit B MCHC, ATH Abbottabad during 6 months, from 1st August 2021–31st January 2022. Results: Total Patients Delivered during this duration of study were 777, among which 352 were delivered by C/S were 352. Analysis by Robson ten-group classification system showed C/S Rate as: Group 1:16.81%, Group 2: 78.95%, group 3:1.56%, group 4:77.14%, group 5:89.22%, group 6: 83.33, Group 7:67.86, Group 8:40, group 9:100%, Group 10:46.97. The total Caesarean section rate was 45.3%. Conclusion: By RTGCS analysis, C/S rates Group 5, 4 and 2 are major contributions in overall C/S rates in studied clinical setup. Group 1 and 10 are also contributing. Overall C/S rates can be decreased by working on them.

References

Cagan M, Tanacan A, Aydin Hakli D, Beksac MS. Changing rates of the modes of delivery over the decades (1976, 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016) based on the Robson-10 group classification system in a single tertiary health care center. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2021;34(11):1695–1702.

Souza JP, Gülmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Carroli G, Fawole B, et al. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: The 2004–2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health. BMC Med 2010;8:71.

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(4):e020520.

Ye J, Zhang J, Mikolajczyk R, Torloni MR, Gülmezoglu AM, Betran AP. Association between rates of caesarean section and maternal and neonatal mortality in the 21st century: A worldwide population-based ecological study with longitudinal data. BJOG 2016;123(5):745–53.

Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. A systematic review of the Robson classification for caesarean section: What works, doesn’t work and how to improve it. PLoS One 2014;9(6):e97769.

Robson M. The ten group classification system (TGCS)-a common starting point for more detailed analysis. BJOG 2015;122(5):701.

Kirchengast S, Hartmann B. Recent lifestyle parameters are associated with increasing caesarean section rates among singleton term births in Austria. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16(1):14.

WHO. Robson Classification: Implementation Manual; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017.

WHO. WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015; p.667–70.

Gardner K, Henry A, Thou S, Davis G, Miller T. “Re: Improving VBAC rates: the combined impact of two management strategies,” Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2015;54(2):195.

Downloads

Published

2022-06-21