A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2014 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
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 |