PDF herunterladen
Am J Perinatol 2024; 41(09): 1223-1231
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748527
Original Article

Comparison of Cesarean Deliveries in a Multicenter U.S. Cohort Using the 10-Group Classification System

Daniel N. Pasko 
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
,
Paula McGee
2   The George Washington University Biostatistics Center, Washington, District of Columbia
,
William A. Grobman
3   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois
,
Jennifer L. Bailit
4   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, MetroHealth Medical Center-Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
,
Uma M. Reddy
5   The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, Maryland
,
Ronald J. Wapner
6   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University, New York, New York
,
Michael W. Varner 
7   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
,
John M. Thorp Jr.
8   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
,
Steve N. Caritis
9   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Mona Prasad
10   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
,
George R. Saade
11   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas
,
Yoram Sorokin
12   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
,
Dwight J. Rouse
13   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
,
Jorge E. Tolosa
14   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
,
for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network › Institutsangaben Funding The project described was supported by grants from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) [HD21410, HD27869, HD27915, HD27917, HD34116, HD34208, HD36801, HD40500, HD40512, HD40544, HD40545, HD40560, HD40485, HD53097, HD53118] and the National Center for Research Resources [UL1 RR024989; 5UL1 RR025764]. Comments and views of the authors do not necessarily represent views of the National Institutes of Health.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective We sought to (1) use the Robson 10-Group Classification System (TGCS), which classifies deliveries into 10 mutually exclusive groups, to characterize the groups that are primary contributors to cesarean delivery frequencies, (2) describe inter-hospital variations in cesarean delivery frequencies, and (3) evaluate the contribution of patient characteristics by TGCS group to hospital variation in cesarean delivery frequencies.

Study Design This was a secondary analysis of an observational cohort of 115,502 deliveries from 25 hospitals between 2008 and 2011. The TGCS was applied to the cohort and each hospital. We identified and compared the TGCS groups with the greatest relative contributions to cohort and hospital cesarean delivery frequencies. We assessed variation in hospital cesarean deliveries attributable to patient characteristics within TGCS groups using hierarchical logistic regression.

Results A total of 115,211 patients were classifiable in the TGCS (99.7%). The cohort cesarean delivery frequency was 31.4% (hospital range: 19.1–39.3%). Term singletons in vertex presentation with a prior cesarean delivery (group 5) were the greatest relative contributor to cohort (34.8%) and hospital cesarean delivery frequencies (median: 33.6%; range: 23.8–45.5%). Nulliparous term singletons in vertex (NTSV) presentation (groups 1 [spontaneous labor] and 2 [induced or absent labor]: 28.9%), term singletons in vertex presentation with a prior cesarean delivery (group 5: 34.8%), and preterm singletons in vertex presentation (group 10: 9.8%) contributed to 73.2% of the relative cesarean delivery frequency for the cohort and were correlated with hospital cesarean delivery frequencies (Spearman's rho = 0.96). Differences in patient characteristics accounted for 34.1% of hospital-level cesarean delivery variation in group 2.

Conclusion The TGCS highlights the contribution of NTSV presentation to cesarean delivery frequencies and the impact of patient characteristics on hospital-level variation in cesarean deliveries among nulliparous patients with induced or absent labor.

Key Points

  • We report on the cesarean delivery frequencies in a multicenter U.S. cohort.

  • NTSV gestations (groups 1 and 2) are a primary driver of cesarean deliveries.

  • Patient characteristics contributed most to hospital variation in cesarean deliveries in group 2.

Keywords

cesarean delivery - 10-Group Classification System - Robson - nulliparous term singletons in vertex

* See the Supplementary Materials for a list of other members of the NICHD MFMU Network.


Supplementary Material



Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 21. Februar 2022

Angenommen: 14. März 2022

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
03. Juni 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP. et al. Classifications for cesarean section: a systematic review. PLoS One 2011; 6 (01) e14566
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Souza JP, Gülmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P. et al; WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health Research Group. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health. BMC Med 2010; 8: 71
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Joint Commission.. Specifications Manual for Joint Commission National Quality Measures (v2016B1). Measurement Information Form PC-02;. 2017. . Accessed March 30, 2022 at: https://manual.jointcommission.org/releases/TJC2016B1/MIF0167.html
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 4 World Health Organization Human Reproduction Programme, 10 April 2015. WHO Statement on caesarean section rates. Reprod Health Matters 2015; 23 (45) 149-150
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 FIGO Working Group On Challenges In Care Of Mothers And Infants During Labour And Delivery. Best practice advice on the 10-Group Classification System for cesarean deliveries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2016; 135 (02) 232-233
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate?. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 15 (01) 179-194
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. A systematic review of the Robson classification for caesarean section: what works, doesn't work and how to improve it. PLoS One 2014; 9 (06) e97769
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Hehir MP, Ananth CV, Siddiq Z, Flood K, Friedman AM, D'Alton ME. Cesarean delivery in the United States 2005 through 2014: a population-based analysis using the Robson 10-Group Classification System. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 219 (01) 105.e1-105.e11
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Maso G, Alberico S, Monasta L. et al. The application of the Ten Group classification system (TGCS) in caesarean delivery case mix adjustment. A multicenter prospective study. PLoS One 2013; 8 (06) e62364
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Colais P, Fantini MP, Fusco D. et al. Risk adjustment models for interhospital comparison of CS rates using Robson's ten group classification system and other socio-demographic and clinical variables. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2012; 12: 54
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Gerli S, Favilli A, Franchini D. et al. Is the Robson's classification system burdened by obstetric pathologies, maternal characteristics and assistential levels in comparing hospitals cesarean rates? A regional analysis of class 1 and 3. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2018; 31 (02) 173-177
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Bailit J, Garrett J. Comparison of risk-adjustment methodologies for cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102 (01) 45-51
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Bailit JL, Grobman WA, Rice MM. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal–Fetal Medicine Units Network. Risk-adjusted models for adverse obstetric outcomes and variation in risk-adjusted outcomes across hospitals. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209 (05) 446.e1-446.e30
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Synnes AR, Macnab YC, Qiu Z. et al; Canadian Neonatal Network. Neonatal intensive care unit characteristics affect the incidence of severe intraventricular hemorrhage. Med Care 2006; 44 (08) 754-759
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Bailit JL, Gregory KD, Srinivas S, Westover T, Grobman WA, Saade GR. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) Quality and Safety and Health Policy Committees. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) Special Report: current approaches to measuring quality of care in obstetrics. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 215 (03) B8-B16
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Main EK, Chang SC, Cape V, Sakowski C, Smith H, Vasher J. Safety assessment of a large-scale improvement collaborative to reduce nulliparous cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol 2019; 133 (04) 613-623
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Main EK, Chang SC, Cheng YW, Rosenstein MG, Lagrew DC. Hospital-level variation in the frequency of cesarean delivery among nulliparous women who undergo labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 2020; 136 (06) 1179-1189
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 World Health Organization.. Robson Classification: Implementation Manual. Geneva: WHO; 2017
    Suche in Google Scholar