scholarly journals OBSTETRIC AUDIT BASED ON ROBSON TEN-GROUP CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-48
Author(s):  
Anatoly E. Miroshnikov ◽  
N. A Zharkin
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Classification System ◽  
Group Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
Initial State ◽  
Cesarean Section Delivery ◽  
Main Determinants ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Abdominal Delivery

The problem of the increase in the frequency of Cesarean section delivery has not been resolved yet. Firstly, a large variation in the initial state of puerpera, secondly, a wide variety of indications to the operation fail to allow revealing main determinants. In order to develop and implement effective measures to reduce the rate of the abdominal delivery, an understandable, logical classification of patients is necessary. The World Health Organization recommends the use of Robson Ten-Group Classification System. This study executed with the use of the Robson scale reveals the contingent of patients in whom the decline in the frequency of abdominal deliveries is possible. The authors propose a set of measures aimed at reducing the rate of Cesarean section in institutions of the second level.

scholarly journals Cesarean Section Rate Analysis in a Tertiary Hospital in Portugal According to Robson Ten Group Classification System

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (06) ◽  
pp. 310-315
Author(s):  
Sara Vargas ◽  
Susana Rego ◽  
Nuno Clode
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Classification System ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Group Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
Rate Analysis ◽  
Vaginal Deliveries ◽  
The World ◽  
Obstetric Population ◽  
Health Organization

Abstract Objective The Robson 10 group classification system (RTGCS) is a reproducible, clinically relevant and prospective classification system proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a global standard for assessing, monitoring and comparing cesarean section (CS) rates. The purpose of the present study is to analyze CS rates according to the RTGCS over a 3-year period and to identify the main contributors to this rate. Methods We reviewed data regarding deliveries performed from 2014 up to 2016 in a tertiary hospital in Portugal, and classified all women according to the RTGCS. We analyzed the CS rate in each group. Results We included data from 6,369 deliveries. Groups 1 (n = 1,703), 2 (n = 1,229) and 3 (n = 1,382) represented 67.7% of the obstetric population. The global CS rate was 25% (n = 1,594). Groups 1, 2, 5 and 10 were responsible for 74.2% of global CS deliveries. Conclusion As expected, Groups 1, 2, 5 and 10 were the greatest contributors to the overall CS rate. An attempt to increase the number of vaginal deliveries in these groups, especially in Groups 2 and 5, might contribute to the reduction of the CS rate.

scholarly journals OBSTETRIC AUDIT OF CAESAREAN SECTION FREQUENCY IN LEVEL II HOSPITALS FOR 2016–2019, BASED ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF M. ROBSON

2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 65-67
Author(s):  
A.E. Miroshnikov ◽  
◽  
N.A. Zharkin ◽  
E.P. Shevtsova ◽  
Yu.A. Shatilova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Caesarean Section ◽  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Obstetric Care ◽  
Initial State ◽  
Large Variability ◽  
Robson Classification ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Main Determinants ◽  
Abdominal Delivery

The caesarean section is an important factor characterizing of obstetric care. In recent decades, the frequency of cesarean section has become pandemic. The large variability of the initial state of women in labor and the variety of indications for surgery do not allow us to identify the main determinants. In order to develop effective measures to reduce the frequency of abdominal delivery, WHO recommends using the M. Robson classification (TGCS). A study using the M. Robson scale identifies the patient population, among which a decrease in the number of abdominal delivery is possible and measures can be developed aimed at reducing the frequency of cesarean section in level II hospitals.

A New Way of Evaluating Cesarean Section Birth: The Robson's Ten Group Classification System

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 212-216
Author(s):  
Indra Bhati ◽  
Akriti Jha ◽  
Nishu Agarwal
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Classification System ◽  
Group Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
Group V ◽  
Global Epidemic ◽  
Nulliparous Women ◽  
Group I ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Health Organization

ABSTRACT Introduction Cesarean section (CS) is the most common obstetric surgery and one of the most rewarding surgeries performed. The number of CSs has been growing rapidly, and concern has been expressed at the growing rate in some countries, with some referring to it as an emerging “global epidemic.” Aim The purpose of this study was to study the incidence and analyze different indications of CS in our institution and to compare the frequency of CS in Robson's ten group classification system (TGCS). Materials and methods A prospective hospital-based study for a duration of 3 months (January 2012 to March 2012) was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Umaid Hospital, Jodhpur. All patients admitted beyond 20 weeks gestation were included in the study, and record of all births during this period was evaluated. Each delivery was then classified into one of ten mutually exclusive categories according to obstetric characteristics. The information was used to identify the group that accounted for largest proportion of women or group that contributed most to CS and identify the areas for potential modification. Results We found cesarean rate of 28.6% during our study period, which is well above the World Health Organization guidelines. Group V (single, term, cephalic, previous CS) was the largest contributor to CS rates (30.4%). Groups I and II were the 2nd and 3rd largest contributors, i.e., 27.5 and 17.5% respectively. Maximum CS rate of 100% was found in group IX (abnormal lie), which was within the expected range. Group 2 had CS rate more than that of group I, and IV had a rate more than that of group I, which indicates that induction and cesarean before labor increases cesarean rate in both multiparous and nulliparous women. In our study, Robson's TGCS demonstrated the need to focus on groups I, II, III, and V because the contribution of these groups to overall cesarean rate was 82%. Clinical significance Ten group classification system was found to be a useful framework for auditing and analyzing different CS rates and their reasons. This will help in not only identifying the priority areas for the changes in clinical practice but also reducing cesarean rate. How to cite this article Bhati I, Jha A, Agarwal N. A New Way of Evaluating Cesarean Section Birth: The Robson's Ten Group Classification System. J South Asian Feder Obst Gynae 2016;8(3):212-216.

The ICF: A Classification System and Conceptual Framework Ideal for Audiological Rehabilitation

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Pierre Gagné ◽  
Mary Beth Jennings ◽  
Kenneth Southall
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Classification System ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Conditions ◽  
International Classification Of Functioning ◽  
Health It ◽  
Common Framework ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Rehabilitation Sciences

Abstract In 2001, the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health, commonly referred to as the ICF (WHO, 2001), which is a biopsychosocial classification system of health. It provides a common framework for describing consequences of health conditions and specifically for understanding the dimensions of health and functioning. The ICF is particularly relevant for rehabilitation sciences because the health conditions of people seeking rehabilitation services are typically chronic and the associated impairments cannot be cured. The present article highlights some key differences between a curative and a rehabilitative approach to health services. Then, the components of the IFC are defined, described, and illustrated. The main characteristics of the classification system are outlined. Finally, some important features associated with the use of the ICF as a conceptual framework for clinical services in rehabilitative audiology are presented.

Sixth Edition: the New Standard

2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Robert D. Rondinelli ◽  
Elizabeth Genovese ◽  
Craig Uejo ◽  
Marjorie Eskay-Auerbach
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
World Health ◽  
International Classification Of Functioning ◽  
Revision Process ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Impairment Ratings ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Impairment Severity

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, was published in December 2007 and is the result of efforts to enhance the relevance of impairment ratings, improve internal consistency, promote precision, and simplify the rating process. The revision process was designed to address shortcomings and issues in previous editions and featured an open, well-defined, and tiered peer review process. The principles underlying the AMA Guides have not changed, but the sixth edition uses a modified conceptual framework based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), a comprehensive model of disablement developed by the World Health Organization. The ICF classifies domains that describe body functions and structures, activities, and participation; because an individual's functioning and disability occur in a context, the ICF includes a list of environmental factors to consider. The ICF classification uses five impairment classes that, in the sixth edition, were developed into diagnosis-based grids for each organ system. The grids use commonly accepted consensus-based criteria to classify most diagnoses into five classes of impairment severity (normal to very severe). A figure presents the structure of a typical diagnosis-based grid, which includes ranges of impairment ratings and greater clarity about choosing a discreet numerical value that reflects the impairment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document