Caesarean section rates analysed using Robson's 10-Group Classification System: a cross-sectional study at a tertiary hospital in Ethiopia.
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to assess the caesarean section (CS) rates using Robson's 10-Group Classification System among women who gave birth at Hawassa University Referral Hospital in southern Ethiopia. DESIGN:Cross-sectional study design to determine CS rate using Robson's 10-Group Classification System. SETTING:Hawassa University Referral Hospital in south Ethiopia. PARTICIPANTS:4004 women who gave birth in Hawassa University Referral Hospital from June 2018 to June 2019. RESULTS:The 4004 women gave birth to 4165 babies. The overall CS rate was 32.8% (95% CI: 31.4%-34.3%). The major contributors to the overall CS rates were: Robson group 1 (nulliparous women with singleton pregnancy at term in spontaneous labour) 22.9%; group 5 (multiparous women with at least one previous CS) 21.4% and group 3 (multiparous women without previous CS, with singleton pregnancy in spontaneous labour) 17.3%. The most commonly reported indications for CS were 'fetal compromise' (35.3%) followed by previous CS (20.3%) and obstructed labour (10.7%). CONCLUSION:A high proportion of women giving birth at this hospital were given a CS, and many of them were in a low-risk group. Few had trial of labour. More active use of partogram, improving fetal heartbeat-monitoring system, implementing midwife-led care, involving a companion during labour and auditing the appropriateness of CS indications may help to reduce the CS rate.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Caesarean section (CS) rate is a quality of health care indicator frequently used at national and international level. The aim of this study was to assess whether adjustment for Robson's Ten Group Classification System (TGCS), and clinical and socio-demographic variables of the mother and the fetus is necessary for inter-hospital comparisons of CS rates. METHODS: The study population includes 64,423 deliveries in Emilia-Romagna between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2004, classified according to theTGCS. Poisson regression was used to estimate crude and adjusted hospital relative risks of CS compared to a reference category. Analyses were carried out in the overall population and separately according to the Robson groups (groups I, II, III, IV and V-X combined). Adjusted relative risks (RR) of CS were estimated using two risk-adjustment models; the first (M1) including the TGCS group as the only adjustment factor; the second (M2) including in addition demographic and clinical confounders identified using a stepwise selection procedure. Percentage variations between crude and adjusted RRs by hospital were calculated to evaluate the confounding effect of covariates. RESULTS: The percentage variations from crude to adjusted RR proved to be similar in M1 and M2 model. However, stratified analyses by Robson's classification groups showed that residual confounding for clinical and demographic variables was present in groups I (nulliparous, single, cephalic, ?37 weeks, spontaneous labour) and III (multiparous, excluding previous CS, single, cephalic, ?37 weeks, spontaneous labour) and IV (multiparous, excluding previous CS, single, cephalic, ?37 weeks, induced or CS before labour) and to a minor extent in groups II (nulliparous, single, cephalic, ?37 weeks, induced or CS before labour) and IV (multiparous, excluding previous CS, single, cephalic, ?37 weeks, induced or CS before labour). CONCLUSIONS: The TGCS classification is useful for inter-hospital comparison of CS section rates, but residual confounding is present in the TGCS strata.
Project description:BACKGROUND: In industrialized countries, improvements have been made in both maternal and newborn health. While attention to antenatal care is increasing, excessive medicalization is also becoming more common.The aim of this study is to compare caesarean section (CS) frequency and ultrasound scan utilization in a public model of care involving both midwives and obstetricians with a private model in which care is provided by obstetricians only. METHODS: DESIGN: Observational population-based study. SETTING: Reggio Emilia Province. POPULATION: 5957 women resident in the province who delivered between October 2010 and November 2011. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CS frequency and ultrasound scan utilization, stillbirths, and other negative perinatal outcomes. Women in the study were searched in the public family and reproductive health clinic medical records to identify those cared for in the public system. Outcomes of the two antenatal care models were compared through multivariate logistic regression adjusting for maternal characteristics and, for CS only, by stratifying by Robson's Group. RESULTS: Compared to women cared for in private services (N = 3,043), those in public service (N = 2,369) were younger, less educated, more frequently non-Italian, and multiparous. The probability of CS was slightly higher for women cared for by private obstetricians than for those cared for in the public system (31.8% vs. 27.1%; adjusted odds ratio: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.93-1.29): The probability of having more than 3 ultrasound scans was higher in private care (89.6% vs. 49.8%; adjusted odds ratio: 5.11; 95% CI: 4.30-6.08). CS frequency was higher in private care for all Robson's classes except women who underwent CS during spontaneous labour. Among negative perinatal outcomes only a higher risk of pre-term birth was observed for pregnancies cared for in private services. CONCLUSIONS: The public model provides less medicalized and more guidelines-oriented care than does the private model, with no increase in negative perinatal outcomes.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To analyse caesarean section (CS) using Robson 10-group classification system in an Ethiopian university hospital. DESIGN:Cross-sectional study. SETTING:A university hospital in eastern, Ethiopia. PARTICIPANTS:980 women who underwent CS from January 2016 to April 2017. MAIN OUTCOME:Robson groups (1-10-based on gestational age, fetal presentation, number of fetus, onset of labour and history of CS) and indications for CS. RESULTS:Robson group 3 (multiparous women with single cephalic full-term pregnancy in spontaneous labour with no history of CS), group 5 (multiparous women with single cephalic full-term pregnancy with history of CS) and group 1 (single cephalic nulliparous women full-term pregnancy in spontaneous labour) were the major contributors to the overall CS at 21.4%, 21.1% and 19.3%, respectively. The three major indications for CS were fetal compromise (mainly fetal distress), obstructed labour (mainly cephalopelvic disproportion) and previous CS. CONCLUSION:Robson groups 3, 5 and 1 were the major contributors to the overall CS rate. Fetal compromise, obstructed labour and previous CS were the underlying indications for performing CS. Further study is required to assess the appropriateness of the indications and to reduce CS among the low-risk groups (groups 1 and 3).
Project description:To compare mode of birth and medical interventions between broadly equivalent birth settings in England and the Netherlands.Data were combined from the Birthplace study in England (from April 2008 to April 2010) and the National Perinatal Register in the Netherlands (2009). Low risk women in England planning birth at home (16,470) or in freestanding midwifery units (11,133) were compared with Dutch women with planned home births (40,468). Low risk English women with births planned in alongside midwifery units (16,418) or obstetric units (19,096) were compared with Dutch women with planned midwife-led hospital births (37,887).CS rates varied across planned births settings from 6.5% to 15.5% among nulliparous and 0.6% to 5.1% among multiparous women. CS rates were higher among low risk nulliparous and multiparous English women planning obstetric unit births compared to Dutch women planning midwife-led hospital births (adjusted (adj) OR 1.89 (95% CI 1.64 to 2.18) and 3.66 (2.90 to 4.63) respectively). Instrumental vaginal birth rates varied from 10.7% to 22.5% for nulliparous and from 0.9% to 5.7% for multiparous women. Rates were lower in the English comparison groups apart from planned births in obstetric units. Transfer, augmentation and episiotomy rates were much lower in England compared to the Netherlands for all midwife-led groups. In most comparisons, epidural rates were higher among English groups.When considering maternal outcomes, findings confirm advantages of giving birth in midwife-led settings for low risk women. Further research is needed into strategies to decrease rates of medical intervention in obstetric units in England and to reduce rates of avoidable transfer, episiotomy and augmentation of labour in the Netherlands.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To investigate what women who have experienced vacuum extraction or second stage caesarean section (CS) would recommend as mode of birth in case of prolonged second stage of labour. METHODS:A prospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital in Uganda. Between November 2014 and July 2015, women with a term singleton in vertex presentation who had undergone vacuum extraction or second stage CS were included. The first day and 6 months after birth women were asked what they would recommend to a friend: vacuum extraction or CS and why. Outcome measures were: proportions of women choosing vacuum extraction vs. CS and reasons for choosing this mode of birth. RESULTS:The first day after birth, 293/318 (92.1%) women who had undergone vacuum extraction and 176/409 (43.0%) women who had undergone CS recommended vacuum extraction. Of women who had given birth by CS in a previous pregnancy and had vacuum extraction this time, 31/32 (96.9%) recommended vacuum extraction. Six months after birth findings were comparable. Less pain, shorter recovery period, avoiding surgery and the presumed relative safety of vacuum extraction to the mother were the main reasons for preferring vacuum extraction. Main reasons to opt for CS were having experienced CS without problems, CS presumed as being safer for the neonate, CS being the only option the woman was aware of, as well as the concern that vacuum extraction would fail. CONCLUSIONS:Most women would recommend vacuum extraction over CS in case of prolonged second stage of labour.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Caesarean sections (CS) rates continue to increase worldwide without a clear understanding of the main drivers and consequences. The lack of a standardized internationally-accepted classification system to monitor and compare CS rates is one of the barriers to a better understanding of this trend. The Robson's 10-group classification is based on simple obstetrical parameters (parity, previous CS, gestational age, onset of labour, fetal presentation and number of fetuses) and does not involve the indication for CS. This classification has become very popular over the last years in many countries. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the experience of users on the implementation of this classification and proposed adaptations. METHODS:Four electronic databases were searched. A three-step thematic synthesis approach and a qualitative metasummary method were used. RESULTS:232 unique reports were identified, 97 were selected for full-text evaluation and 73 were included. These publications reported on the use of Robson's classification in over 33 million women from 31 countries. According to users, the main strengths of the classification are its simplicity, robustness, reliability and flexibility. However, missing data, misclassification of women and lack of definition or consensus on core variables of the classification are challenges. To improve the classification for local use and to decrease heterogeneity within groups, several subdivisions in each of the 10 groups have been proposed. Group 5 (women with previous CS) received the largest number of suggestions. CONCLUSIONS:The use of the Robson classification is increasing rapidly and spontaneously worldwide. Despite some limitations, this classification is easy to implement and interpret. Several suggested modifications could be useful to help facilities and countries as they work towards its implementation.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>To analyse the current situation of caesarean section in Palestine using the Robson Ten Group Classification System (TGCS).<h4>Design</h4>A population-based birth cohort study.<h4>Setting</h4>Obstetrical departments in three governmental hospitals in Gaza.<h4>Participants</h4>All women (18 908) who gave birth between 1 January 2016 and 30 April 2017.<h4>Methods</h4>The contributions of each group to the study population and to the overall rate of caesarean section were calculated, as well as the rate of caesarean section in each TGCS group. Differences in proportions between study hospitals were assessed by ?<sup>2</sup> test.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>The main outcome was the contributions of each group to the overall caesarean section rate.<h4>Results</h4>The overall rate of caesarean section was 22.9% (4337 of 18 908), ranging from 20.6% in hospital 1 to 24.6% in hospital 3. The largest contributors to the overall caesarean section rate were multiparous women with single cephalic full-term pregnancy who had undergone at least one caesarean section (group 5, 42.6%), women with multiple pregnancies (group 8, 11.6%) and those with single cephalic preterm labour (group 10, 8.1%). Statistically significant differences in caesarean section rates between the study hospitals were observed in group 1 (nulliparous women with single cephalic full-term pregnancy and spontaneous labour), group 4 (multiparous with single cephalic full-term pregnancy with induced labour or prelabour caesarean section), group 5 (multiparous with single cephalic full-term pregnancy with previous caesarean section) and in group 7 (multiparous with breech presentation).<h4>Conclusion</h4>Women in groups 5, 8 and 10 were the largest contributors to the overall caesarean section rate in the study hospitals. Efforts to reduce the differences in obstetrical care between hospitals need to be directed towards increasing the proportion of vaginal births after caesarean section and by reducing primary caesarean section in multiple pregnancies and preterm labour.
Project description:OBJECTIVE: To compare perinatal outcomes, maternal outcomes, and interventions in labour by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour for women with low risk pregnancies. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: England: all NHS trusts providing intrapartum care at home, all freestanding midwifery units, all alongside midwifery units (midwife led units on a hospital site with an obstetric unit), and a stratified random sample of obstetric units. PARTICIPANTS: 64,538 eligible women with a singleton, term (?37 weeks gestation), and "booked" pregnancy who gave birth between April 2008 and April 2010. Planned caesarean sections and caesarean sections before the onset of labour and unplanned home births were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A composite primary outcome of perinatal mortality and intrapartum related neonatal morbidities (stillbirth after start of care in labour, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, brachial plexus injury, fractured humerus, or fractured clavicle) was used to compare outcomes by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour (at home, freestanding midwifery units, alongside midwifery units, and obstetric units). RESULTS: There were 250 primary outcome events and an overall weighted incidence of 4.3 per 1000 births (95% CI 3.3 to 5.5). Overall, there were no significant differences in the adjusted odds of the primary outcome for any of the non-obstetric unit settings compared with obstetric units. For nulliparous women, the odds of the primary outcome were higher for planned home births (adjusted odds ratio 1.75, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.86) but not for either midwifery unit setting. For multiparous women, there were no significant differences in the incidence of the primary outcome by planned place of birth. Interventions during labour were substantially lower in all non-obstetric unit settings. Transfers from non-obstetric unit settings were more frequent for nulliparous women (36% to 45%) than for multiparous women (9% to 13%). CONCLUSIONS: The results support a policy of offering healthy women with low risk pregnancies a choice of birth setting. Women planning birth in a midwifery unit and multiparous women planning birth at home experience fewer interventions than those planning birth in an obstetric unit with no impact on perinatal outcomes. For nulliparous women, planned home births also have fewer interventions but have poorer perinatal outcomes.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Caesarean section (CS) rates have increased worldwide in recent decades. In 2015, the WHO proposed the use of the 10-group Robson classification as a global standard for assessing, monitoring and comparing CS rates both within healthcare facilities over time and between them. The aim of this study was to assess the pattern of CS rates according to the Robson classification and describe maternal and perinatal outcomes by group at the Tosamaganga Hospital in rural Tanzania. DESIGN:Observational retrospective study. SETTING:St. John of the Cross Tosamaganga Hospital, a referral centre in rural Tanzania. PARTICIPANTS:3012 women who gave birth in Tosamaganga Hospital from 1 January to 30 June 2014 and from 1 March to 30 November 2015. RESULTS:The overall CS rate was 35.2%, and about 90% of women admitted for labour were in Robson groups 1 through 5. More than 40% of the CS carried out in the hospital were performed on nulliparous women at term with a single fetus in cephalic presentation (groups 1 and 3), and the most frequent indication for the procedure was previous uterine scar (39.2%). The majority of severe neonatal outcomes were observed in groups 1 (27.7%), 10 (24.5%) and 3 (19.1%). CONCLUSION:We recorded a high CS rate in Tosamaganga Hospital, particularly in low-risk patients groups (Robson groups 1 and 3). Our analysis of Robson classification and neonatal outcomes suggests the need to improve labour management at the hospital and to provide timely referrals in order to prevent women from arriving there in critical conditions.
Project description:To construct a hybrid model classification for cesarean section (CS) deliveries based on the woman-characteristics (Robson's classification with additional layers of indications for CS, keeping in view low-resource settings available in India).This is a cross-sectional study conducted at Nalanda Medical College, Patna. All the women delivered from January 2016 to May 2016 in the labor ward were included. Results obtained were compared with the values obtained for India, from secondary analysis of WHO multi-country survey (2010-2011) by Joshua Vogel and colleagues' study published in "The Lancet Global Health." The three classifications (indication-based, Robson's and hybrid model) applied for categorization of the cesarean deliveries from the same sample of data and a semiqualitative evaluations done, considering the main characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of each classification system.The total number of women delivered during study period was 1462, out of which CS deliveries were 471. Overall, CS rate calculated for NMCH, hospital in this specified period, was 32.21% (p = 0.001). Hybrid model scored 23/23, and scores of Robson classification and indication-based classification were 21/23 and 10/23, respectively.Single-study centre and referral bias are the limitations of the study.Given the flexibility of the classifications, we constructed a hybrid model based on the woman-characteristics system with additional layers of other classification. Indication-based classification answers why, Robson classification answers on whom, while through our hybrid model we get to know why and on whom cesarean deliveries are being performed.