Cesarean section rate by Robson groups in an intermediate complexity centre in the city of Bogotá, 2012-2014
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18597/rcog.381Keywords:
Cesarean section, vaginal delivery after Cesarean section, repeated Cesarean section, Classification, prevalenceAbstract
Introduction: The Robson classification is useful for characterizing women taken to Cesarean section with the aim of implementing successful focused strategies. The objective was to determine specific Cesarean section rates according to the Robson classification in an intermediate complexity hospital.Materials and methods: cross-sectional descriptive study that included women of the state-subsidized health insurance regime seen at a general public hospital between 2012 and 2014. A stratified random sampling was performed on the basis of the birth route, per delivery, based on the delivery/Cesarean section ratio found during the time period. The women were classified under 10 Robson groups. A descriptive analysis was conducted of the demographic variables, the clinical indications reported, and the overall and specific proportions of Cesarean sections in each group. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Institution.
Results: Out of 6558 deliveries during the study period, 1190 were selected. The overall proportion of Cesarean sections was 36.9%. Nulliparous women accounted for 38.5% of the Cesarean sections, followed by the group with previous Cesarean sections (36.4%) for which the specific proportion was 100%. The specific proportion of Cesarean sections in nulliparous women in spontaneous labour was 36.6%, whereas it was 43.3% in the premature delivery group.
Conclusions: The highest specific proportions of Cesarean section were found among women with a previous Cesarean section, women with pre-term delivery and nulliparous women with spontaneous or induced delivery. These groups
could lend themselves for intervention in order to have an impact on the rates of Cesarean section in the Institution.
Author Biographies
Diana Liliana Jiménez-Hernández
Andrea del Pilar Guevara-Rodríguez
John Jairo Zuleta-Tobón
Jorge Andrés Rubio-Romero
Profesor titular, Departamento de Obstetricia y Ginecología, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá (Colombia).
jarubior@unal.edu.co
References
Rubio-Romero JA, Fonseca-Pérez JE, Molina S, Buitrago Leal M, Zuleta JJ, Ángel-Müller E, et al. Racionalización del uso de la cesárea en Colombia. Consenso de la Federación Colombiana de Obstetricia y Ginecología (Fecolsog) y la Federación Colombiana de Perinatología (Fecopen). Bogotá, 2014. Rev Colomb Obstet Ginecol. 2014;65:139-51.
Sistema Integral de Información de la Protección Social – Observatorio de salud materna de Colombia [Internet]. 2015 [visitado 2016 Feb 15]. Disponible en: http://www.sispro.gov.co/Pages/Observatorios/salud_materna.aspx
Souza J, Betran A, Dumont A, de Mucio B, Gibbs Pickens C, Deneux-Tharaux C, et al. A global reference for caesarean section rates (C-Model): a multicountry cross-sectional study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;123:427-36.
World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet Lond Engl. 1985;2:436-7.
Cyr RM. Myth of the ideal cesarean section rate: commentary and historic perspective. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:932-6.
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.
Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gülmezoglu 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 Lond Engl. 2010;375:490-9.
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.
Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS, et al. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ 2007;176:455-60.
Betrán AP, Gulmezoglu AM, Robson M, Merialdi M, Souza JP, Wojdyla D, et al. WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America: classifying caesarean sections. Reprod Health. 2009; 6:1-8.
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.
van Dillen J, Diesch M, Schutte J, Zwart J, Wolterbeek R, van Roosmalen J. Comparing grades of urgency for classification of cesarean delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009;107:16-8.
Althabe F, Belizán JM, Villar J, Alexander S, Bergel E, Ramos S, et al. Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary caesarean sections in Latin America: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet Lond Engl. 2004;363:1934-40.
Anderson GM, Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing cesarean birth rate. Ontario data 1979 to 1982. N Engl J Med. 1984;311:887-92.
Robson M. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev. 2001;12:23-39.
Robson MS, Scudamore IW, Walsh SM. Using the medical audit cycle to reduce cesarean section rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174:199-205.
Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;15:179-94.
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.e1-308.e8.
Zuleta-Tobón JJ, Quintero-Rincón F, Quiceno-Ceballos AM. Aplicación del modelo de Robson para caracterizar la realización de cesáreas en una institución de tercer nivel de atención en Medellín, Colombia: estudio de corte transversal. Rev Colomb Obstet Ginecol. 2013;64:90-9.
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:e97769.
Lamy C, Alexander S. [The World Health Organisation proposes adopting the Robson Classification as an internationally applicable cesarean section classification system]. J Gynécologie Obstétrique Biol Reprod. 2015;44:587-90.
Chong C, Su LL, Biswas A. Changing trends of cesarean section births by the Robson Ten Group Classification in a tertiary teaching hospital. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012;91:1422-7.
Vera GC, Correa BR, Neira MJ, Rioseco RA, Poblete LA. Utilidad de la evaluación de 10 grupos clínicos obstétricos para la reducción de la tasa de cesárea en un hospital docente. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol. 2004;69:219-26.
Kelly S, Sprague A, Fell DB, Murphy P, Aelicks N, Guo Y, et al. Examining caesarean section rates in Canada using the Robson classification system. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013;35:206-14.
Vengoechea PJC, Pérez AC, Betrán AP, Morey M del MM, Borges MMF, Alcácer PX, et al. Clasificación de cesáreas por Grupos de Robson en dos periodos comparativos en el Hospital de Manacor. Prog Obstet Ginecol. 2010;53:385-90.
Litorp H, Kidanto HL, Nystrom L, Darj E, Essén B. Increasing caesarean section rates among low-risk groups: a panel study classifying deliveries according to Robson at a university hospital in Tanzania. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013;13:107.
Lee YYC, Roberts CL, Patterson JA, Simpson JM, Nicholl MC, Morris JM, et al. Unexplained variation in hospital caesarean section rates. Med J Aust. 2013;199:348-53.
Maso G, Piccoli M, Montico M, Monasta L, Ronfani L, Parolin S, et al. Interinstitutional variation of caesarean delivery rates according to indications in selected obstetric populations: a prospective multicenter study. BioMed Res Int. 2013;2013:786563.
Sørbye IK, Vangen S, Oneko O, Sundby J, Bergsjø P. Caesarean section among referred and self-referred birthing women: a cohort study from a tertiary hospital, northeastern Tanzania. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2011;11:55.
Maso G, Alberico S, Monasta L, Ronfani L, Montico M, Businelli C, et al. The application of the Ten Group classification system (TGCS) in caesarean delivery case mix adjustment. A multicenter prospective study. PloS One. 2013;8:e62364.
Barčaite E, Kemekliene G, Railaite DR, Bartusevičius A, Maleckiene L, Nadišauskiene R. Cesarean section rates in Lithuania using Robson Ten Group Classification System. Med Kaunas Lith. 2015;51:280-5.
Robson M, Hartigan L, Murphy M. Methods of achieving and maintaining an appropriate caesarean section rate. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27:297-308.
McCarthy FP, Rigg L, Cady L, Cullinane F. A new way of looking at Caesarean section births. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;47:316-20.
Rozen G, Ugoni AM, Sheehan PM. A new perspective on VBAC: a retrospective cohort study. Women Birth J Aust Coll Midwives. 2011;24:3-9.
Chaillet N, Dumont A. Evidence-based strategies for reducing cesarean section rates: a meta-analysis. Birth Berkeley Calif. 2007;34:53-64.
Examining cesarean delivery rates in British Columbia using the Robson Ten Classification [Internet]. [Visitado 2016 Feb 29]. Disponible en: http://www.perinatalservicesbc.ca/Documents/Data-Surveillance/Reports/SurveillanceSpecialReportRobsonTenClassificationDec2011.pdf
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (College), Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, Rouse DJ. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:179-93.
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 Gynecol Obstet. 2015;129:236-9.
Evidence-based strategies for implementing guidelines in obstetrics: a systematic review. - PubMed - NCBI [Internet]. [Visitado 2016 Feb 5]. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17077251
Chaillet N, Dumont A. Evidence-based strategies for reducing cesarean section rates: a meta-analysis. Birth Berkeley Calif. 2007;34:53-64.
Molina G, Weiser TG, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, Uribe-Leitz T, Azad T, et al. Relationship Between Cesarean Delivery Rate and Maternal and Neonatal Mortality. JAMA. 2015 1;314:2263-70.
How to Cite
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
