Title: Analysis of caeserian section rate using robson’s classification in a tertiary care hospital of eastern Odisha

Authors: Tapasi Pati, Satyabhama Marandi*, Sanjukta Mohapatra

 DOI:  https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v6i9.28

Abstract

Introduction: With increased safety of operative deliveries the caesarean section rates have been increasing steadily all over the world. Analysis of the caesarean section rate of a centre would allow insight into preventable causes of the rising problem.

Objective: This retrospective study was undertaken to analyse the indications of caesarean deliveries in one year period from 18 Jun 2017 to 17 Jun 2018 using Robson’s Ten Group Classification System and to find out the preventable causes of caesarean section.

Method: All patients who delivered during this period were identified based on labour room delivery register. Their records were analysed on basis of age, parity, risk factors, mode of delivery, intra partum events and indication of caesarean section. Data was entered in Excel sheet and classified as per Robson’s Ten Group Classification System.

Results: Caesarean section rate was 52.7% during the study period. Caesarean section was lowest in Group 3(10.31%) and highest in Group 6(92.68%). Group 2 made the highest contribution to overall Caesarean section rate (23.93%). Analysis of indications in Group 2 showed that Oligohydramnious and Post ART pregnancies were the two modifiable indications where decision towards Caesarean section was much liberal.

Conclusion: Strategies to reduce the caesarean section rate should concentrate on Primigravida who are getting admission to the Hospital for safe confinement i.e not in labour. Hospital needs to review its policy regarding intervention in oligohydramnious and post ART pregnancies. Strict Policy guidelines on Induction of labour protocols and trial of labour in the previous caesarean cases will improve the situation.

Keywords: Caesarean Section, Robson’s Classification, Indications of Caesarean Section.

References

  1. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2(8452):436-7.
  2. Radhakrishnan et al.increasing Trend of Caesarean rates in India:Evidence from NHFS-4.JMSCR.august2017;5(08);26167-26176.
  3. Thomas J .The National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. London. RCOG Press 2001
  4. Turcot L, Marcoux S, Fraser WD. Multivariate analysis of risk factors for operative delivery in Nulliparous women. Canadian early amniotomy study group. Am J Obst Gynae 1997; 176: 395-402.
  5. Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;15(1):179-94.
  6. Betran 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
  7. Gibbons L, Belizan JM, Lauer JA, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 206:331.
  8. Ecker JL, Frigoletto FD. Cesarean delivery and the risk-benefit calculus. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:885-8.
  9. Fuglenes D, Øian P, Kristiansen IS. Obstetricians’ choice of cesarean delivery in ambiguous cases: is it influenced by risk attitude or fear of complaints and litigation? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 200:e1-e8.
  10. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;24: 4360-4370.
  11. Department of Health and Human Services; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Center for Health Statistics. Healthy People 2000: national health promotion and disease prevention objectives: Full report, with commentary (DHHS publication no.(PHS) 91-50212). Washington: Government Printing Office.
  12. Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2001;15:179-94.
  13. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC medicine. 2010 Dec;8(1):18.

Corresponding Author

Dr Satyabhama Marandi

Associate Professor, Dept of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, IMS and SUM Hospital, Bhubaneswar, India

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., Cell: +91 9437518278