A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Betran, Ana Pilar
Data de Publicação: 2014
Outros Autores: Vindevoghel, Nadia, Souza, Joao Paulo, Guelmezoglu, A. Metin, Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097769
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37858
Resumo: Background: Caesarean sections (CS) rates continue to increase worldwide without a clear understanding of the main drivers and consequences. the lack of a standardized internationally-accepted classification system to monitor and compare CS rates is one of the barriers to a better understanding of this trend. the Robson's 10-group classification is based on simple obstetrical parameters (parity, previous CS, gestational age, onset of labour, fetal presentation and number of fetuses) and does not involve the indication for CS. This classification has become very popular over the last years in many countries. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the experience of users on the implementation of this classification and proposed adaptations.Methods: Four electronic databases were searched. A three-step thematic synthesis approach and a qualitative metasummary method were used.Results: 232 unique reports were identified, 97 were selected for full-text evaluation and 73 were included. These publications reported on the use of Robson's classification in over 33 million women from 31 countries. According to users, the main strengths of the classification are its simplicity, robustness, reliability and flexibility. However, missing data, misclassification of women and lack of definition or consensus on core variables of the classification are challenges. To improve the classification for local use and to decrease heterogeneity within groups, several subdivisions in each of the 10 groups have been proposed. Group 5 (women with previous CS) received the largest number of suggestions.Conclusions: the use of the Robson classification is increasing rapidly and spontaneously worldwide. Despite some limitations, this classification is easy to implement and interpret. Several suggested modifications could be useful to help facilities and countries as they work towards its implementation.
id UFSP_8701acbe639e035bad4218bd8b206ed4
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/37858
network_acronym_str UFSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository_id_str 3465
spelling A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve ItBackground: Caesarean sections (CS) rates continue to increase worldwide without a clear understanding of the main drivers and consequences. the lack of a standardized internationally-accepted classification system to monitor and compare CS rates is one of the barriers to a better understanding of this trend. the Robson's 10-group classification is based on simple obstetrical parameters (parity, previous CS, gestational age, onset of labour, fetal presentation and number of fetuses) and does not involve the indication for CS. This classification has become very popular over the last years in many countries. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the experience of users on the implementation of this classification and proposed adaptations.Methods: Four electronic databases were searched. A three-step thematic synthesis approach and a qualitative metasummary method were used.Results: 232 unique reports were identified, 97 were selected for full-text evaluation and 73 were included. These publications reported on the use of Robson's classification in over 33 million women from 31 countries. According to users, the main strengths of the classification are its simplicity, robustness, reliability and flexibility. However, missing data, misclassification of women and lack of definition or consensus on core variables of the classification are challenges. To improve the classification for local use and to decrease heterogeneity within groups, several subdivisions in each of the 10 groups have been proposed. Group 5 (women with previous CS) received the largest number of suggestions.Conclusions: the use of the Robson classification is increasing rapidly and spontaneously worldwide. Despite some limitations, this classification is easy to implement and interpret. Several suggested modifications could be useful to help facilities and countries as they work towards its implementation.WHO, UNDP UNFPA UNICEF WHO World Bank Special Programm, Dept Reprod Hlth & Res, CH-1211 Geneva, SwitzerlandMaternal Child Clin, Calgary, AB, CanadaUniv São Paulo, Ribeirao Preto Med Sch, Dept Social Med, Ribeirao Preto, SP, BrazilBrazilian Cochrane Ctr, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Internal Med, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Internal Med, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of ScienceUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction at the Department of Reproductive Health and Research of the World Health OrganizationPublic Library ScienceWHOMaternal Child ClinUniversidade de São Paulo (USP)Brazilian Cochrane CtrUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Betran, Ana PilarVindevoghel, NadiaSouza, Joao PauloGuelmezoglu, A. MetinTorloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]2016-01-24T14:37:25Z2016-01-24T14:37:25Z2014-06-03info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion10application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097769Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 9, n. 6, 10 p., 2014.10.1371/journal.pone.0097769WOS000336911400021.pdf1932-6203http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37858WOS:000336911400021engPlos Oneinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-01T00:21:46Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/37858Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-01T00:21:46Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
title A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
spellingShingle A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
Betran, Ana Pilar
title_short A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
title_full A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
title_fullStr A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
title_full_unstemmed A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
title_sort A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
author Betran, Ana Pilar
author_facet Betran, Ana Pilar
Vindevoghel, Nadia
Souza, Joao Paulo
Guelmezoglu, A. Metin
Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
author_role author
author2 Vindevoghel, Nadia
Souza, Joao Paulo
Guelmezoglu, A. Metin
Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv WHO
Maternal Child Clin
Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
Brazilian Cochrane Ctr
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Betran, Ana Pilar
Vindevoghel, Nadia
Souza, Joao Paulo
Guelmezoglu, A. Metin
Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
description Background: Caesarean sections (CS) rates continue to increase worldwide without a clear understanding of the main drivers and consequences. the lack of a standardized internationally-accepted classification system to monitor and compare CS rates is one of the barriers to a better understanding of this trend. the Robson's 10-group classification is based on simple obstetrical parameters (parity, previous CS, gestational age, onset of labour, fetal presentation and number of fetuses) and does not involve the indication for CS. This classification has become very popular over the last years in many countries. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the experience of users on the implementation of this classification and proposed adaptations.Methods: Four electronic databases were searched. A three-step thematic synthesis approach and a qualitative metasummary method were used.Results: 232 unique reports were identified, 97 were selected for full-text evaluation and 73 were included. These publications reported on the use of Robson's classification in over 33 million women from 31 countries. According to users, the main strengths of the classification are its simplicity, robustness, reliability and flexibility. However, missing data, misclassification of women and lack of definition or consensus on core variables of the classification are challenges. To improve the classification for local use and to decrease heterogeneity within groups, several subdivisions in each of the 10 groups have been proposed. Group 5 (women with previous CS) received the largest number of suggestions.Conclusions: the use of the Robson classification is increasing rapidly and spontaneously worldwide. Despite some limitations, this classification is easy to implement and interpret. Several suggested modifications could be useful to help facilities and countries as they work towards its implementation.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-06-03
2016-01-24T14:37:25Z
2016-01-24T14:37:25Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097769
Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 9, n. 6, 10 p., 2014.
10.1371/journal.pone.0097769
WOS000336911400021.pdf
1932-6203
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37858
WOS:000336911400021
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097769
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37858
identifier_str_mv Plos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 9, n. 6, 10 p., 2014.
10.1371/journal.pone.0097769
WOS000336911400021.pdf
1932-6203
WOS:000336911400021
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.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
application/pdf
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
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br
_version_ 1814268423185629184