244
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Identifying strategies to reduce cesarean section rates by using Robson ten-group classification

, & ORCID Icon
Pages 2616-2622 | Received 03 Oct 2018, Accepted 18 Sep 2019, Published online: 06 Oct 2019

References

  • Moore B. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2(8452):436–437.
  • NIH. NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement on cesarean delivery on maternal request. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2006;23(1):1–29.
  • Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health. 2015;12(1):57.
  • Ye J, Zhang J, Mikolajczyk R, et al. Association between rates of caesarean section and maternal and neonatal mortality in the 21st century: a worldwide population-based ecological study with longitudinal data. BJOG. 2016;123(5):745–753.
  • Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, et al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21(2):98–113.
  • Gibbons L, Belizan JM, Lauer J, et al. The global numbers and costs of additionally needed and unnecessary caesarean sections performed per year: overuse as a barrier to universal coverage. World Health Report. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2010.
  • Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fet Matern Med Rev. 2001;12(1):23–39.
  • Anderson GM, Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing cesarean birth rate. Ontario data 1979 to 1982. N Engl J Med. 1984;311(14):887–892.
  • Notzon FC, Cnattingius S, Bergsjø P, et al. Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: international comparison by indication. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;170(2):495–504.
  • O’Driscoll K, Foley M, MacDonald D. Active management of labor as an alternative to cesarean section for dystocia. Obstet Gynecol. 1984;63(4):485–490.
  • Robson MS, Scudamore IW, Walsh SM. Using the medical audit cycle to reduce cesarean section rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174(1):199–205.
  • Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP, et al. Classifications for cesarean section: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2011;6(1):e14566.
  • Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, et al. A systematic review of the Robson classification for caesarean section: what works, doesn’t work and how to improve it. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e97769.
  • Brennan DJ, Murphy M, Robson MS, et al. The singleton, cephalic, nulliparous woman after 36 weeks of gestation: contribution to overall cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(2, Part 1):273–279.
  • Chong C, Su LL, Biswas A. Changing trends of cesarean section births by the Robson Ten Group Classification in a tertiary teaching hospital. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012;91(12):1422–1427.
  • Ciriello E, Locatelli A, Incerti M, et al. Comparative analysis of cesarean delivery rates over a 10-year period in a single Institution using 10-class classification. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25(12):2717–2720.
  • Johri M, Ng ESW, Bermudez-Tamayo C, et al. A cluster-randomized trial to reduce caesarean delivery rates in Quebec: cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Med. 2017;15(1):96.
  • California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative. Induction of labor algorithm. Available from: https://www.cmqcc.org/resource/3238/download
  • Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health. Health statistics yearbook 2016. Ankara: General Directorate of Health Research; 2017. p. 70.
  • OECD. Caesarean sections (indicator); 2018; [cited 2018 Sep 01]. Available from: https://data.oecd.org/healthcare/caesarean-sections.htm
  • Macfarlane AJ, Blondel B, Mohangoo AD, et al. Wide differences in mode of delivery within Europe: risk-stratified analyses of aggregated routine data from the Euro-Peristat study. BJOG. 2016;123(4):559–568.
  • Brennan DJ, Robson MS, Murphy M, et al. Comparative analysis of international cesarean delivery rates using 10-group classification identifies significant variation in spontaneous labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(3):308.e1–308.e8.
  • Zhang J, Troendle JF, Yancey MK. Reassessing the labor curve in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187(4):824–828.
  • Zhang J, Landy HJ, Branch DW, et al. Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(6):1281–1287.
  • Harper LM, Caughey AB, Odibo AO, et al. Normal progress of induced labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(6):1113–1118.
  • Rouse DJ, Owen J, Hauth JC. Criteria for failed labor induction: prospective evaluation of a standardized protocol. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(5 Pt 1):671–677.
  • Simon CE, Grobman WA. When has an induction failed? Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(4):705–709.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.