Research Article

Caesarean Section Characteristics Based on Robson Classification at Sanglah Hospital

Sugianto
Sanglah General Hospital, Indonesia
A. A. N. Jaya Kusuma
Sanglah General Hospital, Indonesia
* Corresponding author
Tjok G. A. Suwardewa
Sanglah General Hospital, Indonesia
I. B. Putra Adnyana
Sanglah General Hospital, Indonesia
I. G. N. Harry Wijaya Surya
Sanglah General Hospital, Indonesia
DOI icon 10.24018/ejmed.2022.4.1.1171

Read Counter
1068

Downloads
669

Citations

Share

Article Sidebar

Submitted 2021-12-11
Published 2022-02-18

Read counter = 1068 times

Table of Contents

Article Main Content

Background: Improving maternal and child health can be achieved through programs aimed at reducing maternal mortality rate (MMR) and infant mortality rate (IMR). Apart from going through a normal delivery, labor can also be done by abdominal surgery/ cesarean section (CS). A safe and timely Cesarean Section (CS) remains a major challenge in countries with high MMR, which poses new challenges to these countries in being able to minimize CS without clinical indication. This study aims to determine the rates and characteristics of patients underwent CS, indications of CS, as well as the rate of CS based on Robson's classification system.

Methods: A retrospective descriptive study of labor and delivery cases in the Sanglah General Hospital Denpasar was conducted from the period of 1stJanuary 2018 - 31st December 2018.

Results: From 1121 deliveries in 2018, the rates of CS in that period were 34.3%. As many as 28.1% were the age of 25-29 years. The 31.9% subjects were primigravida, with the gestational age was term around 66%. The majority of samples around 73.2% did not have a history of previous CS. Using Robson criteria, we found that the biggest contribution for CS rate was from group 10 (23.38%), then group 5 (15.84%) and group 2 (13.51%).

Conclusion: Around 385 cases of labor with CS were obtained from a total of 1121 deliveries in 2018 (34.3%). The highest rate was found in the age group of 25-29 years, mothers with first pregnancy (primigravida), most of the gestational age was term, majority did not have a history of previous CS and the highest contribution of CS rate was from Robson group 10 (23.38%).

Keywords: Caesarean Section, characteristics, Robson classification

References

  1. Kemenkes RI. Profil Kesehatan Indonesia. 2016.
     Google Scholar
  2. Mascarello KC, Horta BL, Silveira MF. Maternal complications and cesarean section without indication: systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev. saúde pública. 2017; 51: 105 (2017).
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  3. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PloS one 2016; 11(2): e0148343.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  4. Riskesdas R. Penyajian Pokok- Pokok Hasil Riset Kesehatan Dasar. 2013. (Indonesian).
     Google Scholar
  5. 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. The Lancet. 2006; 367(9525): 1819-1829.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  6. ACOG. Obstetric Care Consensus. Safe Prevention of The Primary Cesarean Delivery. Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine. 2019.
     Google Scholar
  7. World Health Organization. WHO: Robson Classification: Implementation Manual. [Internet] 2017 [cited 2020 Feb 9] Available from: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_health/robson-classification/en/
     Google Scholar
  8. Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP, Widmer M, Allen T, Gulmezoglu M, et al. Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE 2011; 6(1): e14566.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  9. WHO. WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates. Jenewa. 2017.
     Google Scholar
  10. Vogel JP, Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, et al. WHO Multi-Country Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health Research Network. 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(5): e260-e270.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  11. Robson, M. Classification of caesarean sections. Fet. Matern. Med. Rev. 2001; 12: 23–39.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  12. Tanaka K, Mahomed K. The Ten-Group Robson Classification: A Single Centre Approach Identifying Strategies to Optimise Caesarean Section Rates. Obstetrics and Gynecology International. 2017: 1–5.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  13. Rydahl E, Declercq E, Juhl M, Maimburg RD. Cesarean section on a rise—Does advanced maternal age explain the increase? A population register-based study. PLoS ONE. 2019; 14: e0210655.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  14. Hanson C, Betrán AP, Opondo C, Mkumbo E, Manzi F, Mbaruku G, et al. Trends in caesarean section rates between 2007 and 2013 in obstetric risk groups inspired by the Robson classification: results from population‐based surveys in a low‐resource setting. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2019; 126(6): 690-700.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  15. Begum T, Rahman A, Nababan H, Hoque DME, Khan AF, Ali T, et al. Indications and determinants of caesarean section delivery: evidence from a population-based study in Matlab, Bangladesh. PloS One. 2017; 12(11): e0188074.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  16. Panicker S, Chitra TV. Analysis of caesarean delivery rates using the ten group classification system in a tertiary care hospital. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016: 3153–3157.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  17. Landon MB, Leindecker S, Spong CY, Hauth JC, Bloom S, Varner MW, et al. The MFMU Cesarean Registry: factors affecting the success of trial of labor after previous cesarean delivery. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2005; 193(3): 1016-1023.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar
  18. Robson MS. Use of indications to identify appropriate caesarean section rates. The Lancet Global Health. 2018; 6: e820–e821.
    DOI  |   Google Scholar