Cesarean Section Rate in Siriraj Hospital According to the Robson Classification

Article Sidebar

Fulltext
Published: Jan 1, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14456/tjog.2020.2
Keywords:
Robson Classification Cesarean section Delivery Induction of labor

Main Article Content

Sirichet Anekpornwattana
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Jittiyaporn Yangnoi
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Nida Jareemit
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Dittakarn Borriboonhiransan
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the cesarean section (CS) rate in Siriraj Hospital according to Robson classification.


Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, all pregnant women who delivered in Siriraj Hospital during January to August, 2017 were included. Data were retrieved from medical records, including baseline, obstetric, and delivery information. Pregnant women were categorized into ten-group according to Robson classification. Overall and group-specific CS rate and contribution of CS were reported.


Results: A total of 4,998 pregnant women were included. Mean maternal age was 29.9 years, 50.7 % were nulliparous, and 17.9% had previous CS. Of all women, 2,442 were delivered by CS (48.86%). Majority of cases were in group 1 (nulliparous with a single cephalic term pregnancy in spontaneous labor, 31.21%), followed by group 3 (multiparous with a single cephalic term pregnancy in spontaneous labor, 25.21%) and group 5 (multiparous with a previous uterine scar with a single cephalic term pregnancy, 14.17%), respectively. Major contribution of CS were from group 5 (28.91%), group 1 (23.71%), and group 2 (17.65%). Group-specific CS rates in group 1, 2, and 4 (multiparous with a single cephalic term pregnancy without spontaneous labor) were 37.12%, 84.02%, 58.53%, respectively. Further analysis showed that 68.4% of nulliparous and 55% of multiparous women without spontaneous labor (subgroup 2b and 4b) had pre-labor CS and most indications could be unnecessary. CS rate in nulliparous and multiparous women with labor induction (group 2a and 4a) were 49.38% and 7.41%, respectively, and labor was induced before 40 weeks in majority of the women, possibly without appropriate indications.


Conclusion: Overall CS rate in Siriraj Hospital was 48.86%. Group 1 and 2 contributed to one-third of the procedures that appropriate interventions should be developed to reduce CS rate.

Article Details

How to Cite
(1)
Anekpornwattana, S.; Yangnoi, J.; Jareemit, N.; Borriboonhiransan, D. Cesarean Section Rate in Siriraj Hospital According to the Robson Classification. Thai J Obstet Gynaecol 2020, 28, 6-15.
Issue
VOL. 28, NO. 1: (January - March 2020)
Section
Original Article

References

1. World Health Organization Human Reproduction Programme A. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. Reprod Health Matters 2015;23:149-50.
2. Curtin SC, Gregory KD, Korst LM, Uddin SF. Maternal morbidity for vaginal and cesarean deliveries, according to previous cesarean history: new data from the birth certificate, 2013. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2015;64:1-13.
3. Riskin-Mashiah S. Maternal morbidity associated with vaginal versus cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:633.
4. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gulmezoglu AM, Souza JP, Taneepanichskul S, Ruyan P, et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. Lancet 2010;375:490-9.
5. 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;335:1025.
6. Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, et al. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet 2006;367:1819-29.
7. Vogel JP, Betran 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;3:e260-70.
8. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJ. Births in the United States, 2015. NCHS Data Brief 2016:1-8.
9. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gulmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One 2016;11:e0148343.
10. Ferreira EC, Pacagnella RC, Costa ML, Cecatti JG. The Robson ten-group classification system for appraising deliveries at a tertiary referral hospital in Brazil. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2015;129:236-9.
11. Ross S. An illustration of the "inverse care law": A commentary on giving birth in Canada: providers of maternity and infant care. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005;27:51-3.
12. Lynch CM, Sexton DJ, Hession M, Morrison JJ. Obesity and mode of delivery in primigravid and multigravid women. Am J Perinatol 2008;25:163-7.
13. Poobalan AS, Aucott LS, Gurung T, Smith WC, Bhattacharya S. Obesity as an independent risk factor for elective and emergency caesarean delivery in nulliparous women--systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Obes Rev 2009;10:28-35.
14. Roman H, Goffinet F, Hulsey TF, Newman R, Robillard PY, Hulsey TC. Maternal body mass index at delivery and risk of caesarean due to dystocia in low risk pregnancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008;87:163-70.
15. Bell JS, Campbell DM, Graham WJ, Penney GC, Ryan M, Hall MH. Do obstetric complications explain high caesarean section rates among women over 30? A retrospective analysis. BMJ 2001;322:894-5.
16. Callaway LK, Lust K, McIntyre HD. Pregnancy outcomes in women of very advanced maternal age. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2005;45:12-6.
17. Lin HC, Sheen TC, Tang CH, Kao S. Association between maternal age and the likelihood of a cesarean section: a population-based multivariate logistic regression analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004;83:1178-83.
18. Brennan DJ, Robson MS, Murphy M, O'Herlihy C. Comparative analysis of international cesarean delivery rates using 10-group classification identifies significant variation in spontaneous labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;201:308 e1-8.
19. Minkoff H, Chervenak FA. Elective primary cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2003;348:946-50.
20. Robson S, Carey A, Mishra R, Dear K. Elective caesarean delivery at maternal request: a preliminary study of motivations influencing women's decision-making. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2008;48:415-20.
21. Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette MG, Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2004;59:601-16.
22. Anderson GM, Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing cesarean birth rate. Ontario data 1979 to 1982. N Engl J Med 1984;311:887-92.
23. Notzon FC, Cnattingius S, Bergsjo P, Cole S, Taffel S, Irgens L, et al. Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: international comparison by indication. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:495-504.
24. Robson MS, Scudamore IW, Walsh SM. Using the medical audit cycle to reduce cesarean section rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174(1 Pt 1):199-205.
25. Betran AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Gulmezoglu 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:e97769.
26. World Health Organization. Robson classification: implementation manual 2017.
27. Kankoon N, Lumbiganon P, Kietpeerakool C, Sangkomkamhang U, Betran AP, Robson M. Cesarean rates and severe maternal and neonatal outcomes according to the Robson 10-Group Classification System in Khon Kaen Province, Thailand. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2018;140:191-7.
28. Triunfo S, Ferrazzani S, Lanzone A, Scambia G. Identification of obstetric targets for reducing cesarean section rate using the Robson Ten Group Classification in a tertiary level hospital. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015;189:91-5.
29. Tapia V, Betran AP, Gonzales GF. Caesarean Section in Peru: Analysis of Trends Using the Robson Classification System. PLoS One 2016;11:e0148138.
30. Gibson KS, Waters TP. Measures of success: Prediction of successful labor induction. Semin Perinatol 2015;39:475-82.