Robson Classification System Applied to Induction of Labor

被引:3
作者
Vargas, Sara [1 ]
Rego, Susana [1 ]
Clode, Nuno [1 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Hosp Lisboa Norte, Dept Obstet Gynecol & Reprod Med, Lisbon, Portugal
来源
REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE GINECOLOGIA E OBSTETRICIA | 2018年 / 40卷 / 09期
关键词
induction of labor; cesarean section; robson classification;
D O I
10.1055/s-0038-1667340
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective Induction of labor (IL) is a common obstetric procedure, but it is questionable whether or not it results in higher cesarean section (CS) rates. The present study aims to evaluate the impact of IL in the overall CS rates and to analyze these rates according to the method of IL employed and to the Robson group in which it was applied. Methods We have conducted a retrospective study including pregnant women whose labor was induced at a tertiary hospital in 2015 and 2016. All women were classified according to the Robson Classification System (RCS). The CS rates were analyzed and compared regarding the method of IL employed. Results A total of 1,166 cases were included. The CS rate after IL was 20.9%, which represented 23.1% of the total of CSs performed in 2015 and 2016. The highest CS rates were recorded in RCS groups 5 (65.2%) and 8 (32.3%). Group 2 was the highest contributor to the overall CS rate, since it represented 56.7% of the population. The intravaginal prostaglandins method was the most used (77%). Transcervical Foley catheter was the preferred method in group 5 and intravaginal prostaglandins in all the other groups. The CS rate was higher when transcervical Foley catheter was used (34.1%). Conclusion Transcervical Foley catheter induction was associated with a higher rate of CS, probably because it was the preferred method used in group 5.
引用
收藏
页码:513 / 517
页数:5
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour
    Alfirevic, Zarko
    Kelly, Anthony J.
    Dowswell, Therese
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2009, (04):
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2010, Obstet Gynecol, V116, P450, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eeb251
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2009, Obstet Gynecol, V114, P386, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b48ef5
  • [4] Boulvain M, 2001, PAEDIATR PERINAT EP, V15, P131
  • [5] Cunningham FG, 2014, WILLIAMS OBSTET
  • [6] Prediction of Success in External Cephalic Version under Tocolysis: Still a Challenge
    de Macedo, Carolina Vaz
    Clode, Nuno
    da Graca, Luis Mendes
    [J]. ACTA MEDICA PORTUGUESA, 2015, 28 (05): : 554 - 558
  • [7] DireccAo-Geral da Saude, 2015, 12015 DIR GER SAUD
  • [8] Elective repeat caesarean section versus induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth
    Dodd, Jodie M.
    Crowther, Caroline A.
    Grivell, Rosalie M.
    Deussen, Andrea R.
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, (07): : 1 - 13
  • [9] Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth
    Dodd, Jodie M.
    Crowther, Caroline A.
    Huertas, Erasmo
    Guise, Jeanne-Marie
    Horey, Dell
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2013, (12):
  • [10] Preterm induction of labor: predictors of vaginal delivery and labor curves
    Feghali, Maisa
    Timofeev, Julia
    Huang, Chun-Chih
    Driggers, Rita
    Miodovnik, Menachem
    Landy, Helain J.
    Umans, Jason G.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 212 (01) : 91.e1 - 91.e7