Author:
Campos Marcelle Gonçalves,Franco-Sena Ana Beatriz,Rebelo Fernanda
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Compare cesarean section rates between populations or within a population over time using the crude measure is biased mainly due to differences in the characteristics of the obstetric population. The Robson Ten Group Classification (RTGC) is being widely used all over the world based on a few basic obstetrics variables.
Objectives
Propose a method of direct standardization according to RTGC to make the overall rates of cesarean sections comparable between different populations or within the same population over time.
Methods
We used data from the WHO Global Maternal and Perinatal Health Survey (WHOGS) conducted between 2004 and 2008 and data from the WHO Multinational Survey on Maternal and Neonatal Health (WHOMCS) conducted between 2010 and 2011, covering information from obstetric population of 21 countries. The standard population was based in the average size of Robson Groups in WHOMCS. The crude and standardized rates, their differences intra and inter populations, and its respective confidence intervals were calculated.
Results
The impact and importance of the method were demonstrated. The five leading countries list on cesarean rates was completely modified and changes of cesarean rates over time in the same country varied in both directions by the standardization.
Conclusion
This method is useful to compare overall rates as an additional information when RTGC Report Table is been used or, for some type of studies as analytical ecologic studies with multiple groups, where leading with the report tables are laborious and hard to interpret. The use of Robson Ten Group Classification for direct standardization of cesarean rates is easy to apply and interpret.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Reference27 articles.
1. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, et al. Trends and projections of cesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6:e005671.
2. Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP, et al. Classifications for cesarean section: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2011;6(1):e14566.
3. WHO - WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. Robson classification: implementation manual. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. p. 1–56. http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_health/robson-classification/en/. Accessed 3 Dec 2021
4. Cagan M, Tanacan A, Aydin Hakli D, Beksac MS. Change in modes of delivery rates over decades (1976, 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016) based on the Robson-10 group classification system at a single tertiary health center. J Materno-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021;34(11):1695–702.
5. Yamamoto M, Latorre R, Rojas J, et al. Cesarean rates in a Chilean public hospital and the use of a new prioritization criterion: the relevance index. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019;45(3):578–84.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献