The Ten-Group Robson Classification: A Single Centre Approach Identifying Strategies to Optimise Caesarean Section Rates
Hindawi
Obstetrics and Gynecology International
Volume 2017, Article ID 5648938, 5 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5648938
Research Article
The Ten-Group Robson Classification: A Single Centre Approach
Identifying Strategies to Optimise Caesarean Section Rates
Keisuke Tanaka1 and Kassam Mahomed2
1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ipswich Hospital, Ipswich, QLD, Australia
Ipswich Hospital and University of Queensland, Ipswich, QLD, Australia
2
Correspondence should be addressed to Kassam Mahomed; kassam
Received 26 July 2016; Revised 11 December 2016; Accepted 18 December 2016; Published 10 January 2017
Academic Editor: Robert Coleman
Copyright © 2017 K. Tanaka and K. Mahomed. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.
Caesarean section (CS) rates have been increasing worldwide and have caused concerns. For meaningful comparisons to be made
World Health Organization recommends the use of the Ten-Group Robson classification as the global standard for assessing CS
rates. 2625 women who birthed over a 12-month period were analysed using this classification. Women with previous CS (group
5) comprised 10.9% of the overall 23.5% CS rate. Women with one previous CS who did not attempt VBAC contributed 5.3% of
the overall 23.5% CS rate. Second largest contributor was singleton nulliparous women with cephalic presentation at term (5.1%
of the total 23.5%). Induction of labour was associated with higher CS rate (groups 1 and 3) (24.5% versus 11.9% and 6.2% versus
2.6%, resp.). For postdates IOL we recommend a gatekeeper booking system to minimise these being performed <41 weeks. We
suggest setting up dedicated VBAC clinic to support for women with one previous CS. Furthermore review of definition of failure
to progress in labour not only may lower CS rates in groups 1 and 2a but also would reduce the size of group 5 in the future.
1. Introduction
Rising caesarean section (CS) rate is of worldwide concern
particularly in well-resourced countries [1]. The rate has
increased from 23.3% in 2000 to 33% in 2013 in Australia
[2, 3]. It has been reported that rates higher than 9–16%
are not associated with decreases in maternal and neonatal
mortality [4, 5]. There is growing concern about the higher
incidence of long-term complications following one or more
CS such as placenta accreta, retained placenta, and uterine
rupture with possible need for peripartum hysterectomy [6–
8]. Another concern is the varying rates of CS among member
hospitals of Women’s Healthcare Australasia (WHA), ranging
from 18% to 37% [9]. This has been assumed to be due to a
variation in the obstetric populations.
A recent systematic review of 27 different classifications
[10] suggested that the Ten-Group Robson classification
of caesarean sections [11] might allow us to look at CS
rates in specific groups to help identify possible reasons for
this variation. Women who give birth are categorised into
10 groups based on their basic obstetric characteristics of
parity, previous CS, gestational age, mode of onset of labour,
fetal presentation, and number of fetuses. These groups are
structured in such a way that they are mutually exclusive
and totally inclusive. The Ten-Group Robson classification
has been praised for its simplicity, robustness, reproducibility,
and flexibility [12] and has been recommended for both the
monitoring rates over time as well as between facilities by
both WHO in 2014 and FIGO in 2016 [13, 14].
Various modifications or subdivisions to the original ten
groups have been suggested such as having subdivisions
based of the mode of onset of labour [15].
Prior to introducing interventions to address the rising
CS rates we have classified all women who gave birth over a
12 months period from January to December 2015, using the
Ten-Group Robson classification with subdivisions based on
onset of labour.
2. Materials and Methods
The study population included all live births and stillbirths of
at least 400-gram birth weight or at least 20-week gestation at
2
Ipswich Hospital, Queensland, Australia, during the period
January–December 2015. Ipswich Hospital is a secondary
referral University teaching hospital, supported by 24-hour
theatre, anaesthetic, and paediatric services with a special
care nursery equipped to care for neonates from 32-week
gestation.
Data were extracted from the National Perinatal Data
Collection (NPDC), an Australian population-based crosssectional data collection of pregnancy and childbirth and
cross checked with the birth suite register to ensure that no
CS were missed. Medical records were reviewed for missing
or for verifying information. Overall CS rate, relative size of
each group, CS rate, and relative contribution of each group
to the overall CS rate were calculated.
As this review conforms to the standards established by
National Health and Medical Research Council for ethical
quality review [16], ethics approval was not sought.
3. Results
2625 women gave birth to 2663 babies at Ipswich Hospital in
2015. CS was performed in 618 women resulting in an overall
CS rate of 23.5%. Women in each of the ten groups are shown
in Table 1. The table also shows the CS rate in each of these 10
groups as well as the contribution of each group to the overall
CS rate of 23.5%.
The largest contributor to the overall CS rate was women
with previous CS (group 5), 10.9% of the overall 23.5%. CS
rate in this group was 76.5% (287 out of 375 women). 224
out of 287 women (78.0%) had the CS performed prior to
onset of labour (group 5c). Of the 250 women who had had
one previous CS in group 5, altogether 110 (44%) attempted
VBAC. A significant number of these would have been
multiparous women with previous vaginal births. We do not
have the number of women with CS in first pregnancy who
attempted a VBAC in the second pregnancy.
The second largest contributor was groups 1 and 2
combined, the singleton nulliparous women with cephalic
presentation at term. This group that comprised 28.9% of the
total population had an overall CS rate of 17.9% and accounted
for 5.1% of the total CS rate of 23.5%. The prelabour CS rate
in this group (group 2b/group 1 + group 2) was 1.7% (13 out
of 759).
4. Discussion
We present our data to encourage other obstetric units to
adopt this classification that is simple to incorporate into the
routine perinatal data collection system. CS rates for each of
the 10 groups can then become more meaningful and rates
for each group can then be compared with other obstetric
units. Secondly, by identifying groups that contribute most
to the CS rate in our unit, as we believe they would be similar
in other units as well, quality improvement activity could be
initiated to modify the CS rate in a particular group.
The low CS rates, 11.9% in nulliparous women in spontaneous labour, 16.6% in mult (...truncated)