Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
Data de Publicação: 2011
Outros Autores: Betran, Ana Pilar, Souza, Joao Paulo, Widmer, Mariana, Allen, Tomas, Gulmezoglu, Metin, Merialdi, Mario
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
Texto Completo: http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/33355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
Resumo: Background: Rising cesarean section (CS) rates are a major public health concern and cause worldwide debates. To propose and implement effective measures to reduce or increase CS rates where necessary requires an appropriate classification. Despite several existing CS classifications, there has not yet been a systematic review of these. This study aimed to 1) identify the main CS classifications used worldwide, 2) analyze advantages and deficiencies of each system.Methods and Findings: Three electronic databases were searched for classifications published 1968-2008. Two reviewers independently assessed classifications using a form created based on items rated as important by international experts. Seven domains (ease, clarity, mutually exclusive categories, totally inclusive classification, prospective identification of categories, reproducibility, implementability) were assessed and graded. Classifications were tested in 12 hypothetical clinical case-scenarios. From a total of 2948 citations, 60 were selected for full-text evaluation and 27 classifications identified. Indications classifications present important limitations and their overall score ranged from 2-9 (maximum grade = 14). Degree of urgency classifications also had several drawbacks (overall scores 6-9). Woman-based classifications performed best (scores 5-14). Other types of classifications require data not routinely collected and may not be relevant in all settings (scores 3-8).Conclusions: This review and critical appraisal of CS classifications is a methodologically sound contribution to establish the basis for the appropriate monitoring and rational use of CS. Results suggest that women-based classifications in general, and Robson's classification, in particular, would be in the best position to fulfill current international and local needs and that efforts to develop an internationally applicable CS classification would be most appropriately placed in building upon this classification. the use of a single CS classification will facilitate auditing, analyzing and comparing CS rates across different settings and help to create and implement effective strategies specifically targeted to optimize CS rates where necessary.
id UFSP_543d2f327b9e915d68d6b27ae6ff22e0
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/33355
network_acronym_str UFSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository_id_str 3465
spelling Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]Betran, Ana PilarSouza, Joao PauloWidmer, MarianaAllen, TomasGulmezoglu, MetinMerialdi, MarioUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Brazilian Cochrane CtrWorld Hlth Org2016-01-24T14:06:03Z2016-01-24T14:06:03Z2011-01-20Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 6, n. 1, 10 p., 2011.1932-6203http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/33355http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014566WOS000286522200007.pdf10.1371/journal.pone.0014566WOS:000286522200007Background: Rising cesarean section (CS) rates are a major public health concern and cause worldwide debates. To propose and implement effective measures to reduce or increase CS rates where necessary requires an appropriate classification. Despite several existing CS classifications, there has not yet been a systematic review of these. This study aimed to 1) identify the main CS classifications used worldwide, 2) analyze advantages and deficiencies of each system.Methods and Findings: Three electronic databases were searched for classifications published 1968-2008. Two reviewers independently assessed classifications using a form created based on items rated as important by international experts. Seven domains (ease, clarity, mutually exclusive categories, totally inclusive classification, prospective identification of categories, reproducibility, implementability) were assessed and graded. Classifications were tested in 12 hypothetical clinical case-scenarios. From a total of 2948 citations, 60 were selected for full-text evaluation and 27 classifications identified. Indications classifications present important limitations and their overall score ranged from 2-9 (maximum grade = 14). Degree of urgency classifications also had several drawbacks (overall scores 6-9). Woman-based classifications performed best (scores 5-14). Other types of classifications require data not routinely collected and may not be relevant in all settings (scores 3-8).Conclusions: This review and critical appraisal of CS classifications is a methodologically sound contribution to establish the basis for the appropriate monitoring and rational use of CS. Results suggest that women-based classifications in general, and Robson's classification, in particular, would be in the best position to fulfill current international and local needs and that efforts to develop an internationally applicable CS classification would be most appropriately placed in building upon this classification. the use of a single CS classification will facilitate auditing, analyzing and comparing CS rates across different settings and help to create and implement effective strategies specifically targeted to optimize CS rates where necessary.Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Obstet, São Paulo, BrazilBrazilian Cochrane Ctr, São Paulo, BrazilWorld Hlth Org, Dept Reprod Hlth & Res, Geneva, SwitzerlandWorld Hlth Org, Dept Knowledge Management & Sharing, Geneva, SwitzerlandUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Obstet, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of Science10engPublic Library SciencePlos OneClassifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Reviewinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESPORIGINALWOS000286522200007.pdfapplication/pdf157696${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/33355/1/WOS000286522200007.pdf62d4329d9df23e74c3b927d662cd1a4fMD51open accessTEXTWOS000286522200007.pdf.txtWOS000286522200007.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain57965${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/33355/2/WOS000286522200007.pdf.txt1d56c4f441a159d5c207f5647a5bfe1fMD52open access11600/333552022-07-08 10:40:18.745open accessoai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/33355Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:34652023-05-25T12:19:15.857241Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false
dc.title.en.fl_str_mv Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
title Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
spellingShingle Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
title_short Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
title_full Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
title_sort Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
author Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
author_facet Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
Betran, Ana Pilar
Souza, Joao Paulo
Widmer, Mariana
Allen, Tomas
Gulmezoglu, Metin
Merialdi, Mario
author_role author
author2 Betran, Ana Pilar
Souza, Joao Paulo
Widmer, Mariana
Allen, Tomas
Gulmezoglu, Metin
Merialdi, Mario
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.institution.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Brazilian Cochrane Ctr
World Hlth Org
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
Betran, Ana Pilar
Souza, Joao Paulo
Widmer, Mariana
Allen, Tomas
Gulmezoglu, Metin
Merialdi, Mario
description Background: Rising cesarean section (CS) rates are a major public health concern and cause worldwide debates. To propose and implement effective measures to reduce or increase CS rates where necessary requires an appropriate classification. Despite several existing CS classifications, there has not yet been a systematic review of these. This study aimed to 1) identify the main CS classifications used worldwide, 2) analyze advantages and deficiencies of each system.Methods and Findings: Three electronic databases were searched for classifications published 1968-2008. Two reviewers independently assessed classifications using a form created based on items rated as important by international experts. Seven domains (ease, clarity, mutually exclusive categories, totally inclusive classification, prospective identification of categories, reproducibility, implementability) were assessed and graded. Classifications were tested in 12 hypothetical clinical case-scenarios. From a total of 2948 citations, 60 were selected for full-text evaluation and 27 classifications identified. Indications classifications present important limitations and their overall score ranged from 2-9 (maximum grade = 14). Degree of urgency classifications also had several drawbacks (overall scores 6-9). Woman-based classifications performed best (scores 5-14). Other types of classifications require data not routinely collected and may not be relevant in all settings (scores 3-8).Conclusions: This review and critical appraisal of CS classifications is a methodologically sound contribution to establish the basis for the appropriate monitoring and rational use of CS. Results suggest that women-based classifications in general, and Robson's classification, in particular, would be in the best position to fulfill current international and local needs and that efforts to develop an internationally applicable CS classification would be most appropriately placed in building upon this classification. the use of a single CS classification will facilitate auditing, analyzing and comparing CS rates across different settings and help to create and implement effective strategies specifically targeted to optimize CS rates where necessary.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2011-01-20
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2016-01-24T14:06:03Z
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2016-01-24T14:06:03Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 6, n. 1, 10 p., 2011.
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/33355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv 1932-6203
dc.identifier.file.none.fl_str_mv WOS000286522200007.pdf
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
dc.identifier.wos.none.fl_str_mv WOS:000286522200007
identifier_str_mv Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 6, n. 1, 10 p., 2011.
1932-6203
WOS000286522200007.pdf
10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
WOS:000286522200007
url http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/33355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartof.none.fl_str_mv Plos One
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 10
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Public Library Science
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Public Library Science
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron:UNIFESP
instname_str Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron_str UNIFESP
institution UNIFESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv ${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/33355/1/WOS000286522200007.pdf
${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/33355/2/WOS000286522200007.pdf.txt
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv 62d4329d9df23e74c3b927d662cd1a4f
1d56c4f441a159d5c207f5647a5bfe1f
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1783460276090175488