Analysis of cesarean section rates and indications using ten group classification
Keywords:Cesarean section indications, cesarean section rates, classification system, labor, ten groups
Introduction and aim: We performed a retrospective observational study to identify the obstetric parameters of all women submitted to cesarean section in January/February and June/July of 2011 in our institution and the indications to perform it.
Material and Methods: We reviewed the clinical records of these women and categorized them in ten obstetric groups (Robson´s classification) based on the following parameters: single/multiple pregnancy, nulliparity/multiparity/multiparity with a previous cesarean section, cephalic/non-cephalic presentation, spontaneous/induced labour/cesarean section without labour and preterm/term delivery. In each group we analyzed the reason(s) why the cesarean section was performed except for multiple gestations.
Results: There were 1167 single deliveries, 391 by cesarean section and a cesarean section rate of 33,5% (36% elective). Cesarean section was more common in term nulíparas with induced labor and in women with a previous cesarean section. During labor, the most common reasons named by the physician were labor arrest, suspected cephalopelvic disproportion and nonreassuring fetal status. Fetal mal presentation represents 4,4% of cesarean section rate. This contribution is superior to the one of the preterm group (3%). Among term multiparas without a previous scar there were less cesarean sections.
Conclusions: The analysis of these results suggests that avoiding a fi rst elective cesarean section and allowing a spontaneous labor onset are essential for long term decrease in cesarean section rates. Efforts should be made to convert subjective indications into objective ones, trough well defi ned evidence-based guidelines regarding intrapartum fetal monitoring and labor arrest.
Graça LM. Cesariana. In: Graça LM (ed). Medicina Materno-Fetal. 4ª ed. Lisboa: Lidel; 2010. p. 689-95.
Brennan DJ, Robson MS, Murphy M, O´Herlihy. Comparative analysis of international cesarian delivery rates using 10-group classifi cation identifi es signifi cant variation in spontaneous labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 201:308. e1-8.
Barber EL, Lundsberg LS, Belanger K, Pettker C, Funai E, Illuzzi J. Indications contributing to the increasing caesarean delivery rate. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118: 29-38.
Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 15:179-94.
Maternal, Infant, and Child Health – Objectives. Disponível em: http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/objectiveslist.aspx?topicId=26 (acedido em: 13 de dezembro de 2012).
Relatório da Comissão para a Redução da Taxa de Cesarianas da Administração Regional de Saúde do Norte, I.P. Disponível em: http://portal.arsnorte.min-saude.pt/portal/page/portal/ARSNorte/Conteúdos/GRP/Cesarianas (acedido em: 21 de outubro de 2013).
Robson MS. Classifi cation of cesarean sections. Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review 2001; 12:23-39.
Spong CY, Berghella V, Wenstrom KD, Brian M, Saade GR. Preventing the fi rst caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120:1181-93.
Algert CS, Morris J, Simpson J, Ford J, Roberts C. Labor before a primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112:1061-6.
Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. The Lancet 2000; 356:1375-83.
Glezerman M. Five years to the term breech trial: the rise and fall of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 194:20-5.
Hehir MP, O´Connor HD, Kent EM, Fitzpatrick C, Boylan PC, Coulter-Smith S, et al. Changes in vaginal breech delivery rates in a single large metropolitan area. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206:498.e1-4.
Grootscholten K, Kok M, Oei SG, Mol B, van der Post J. External Cephalic Version-related risks. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112:1143-51.
How to Cite
Copyright and access
This journal offers immediate free access to its content, following the principle that providing free scientific knowledge to the public provides greater global democratization of knowledge.
The works are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 4.0 International license.
Nascer e Crescer – Birth and Growth Medical Journal do not charge any submission or processing fee to the articles submitted.