{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,30]],"date-time":"2026-07-30T09:16:29Z","timestamp":1785402989030,"version":"3.56.0"},"reference-count":23,"publisher":"AOSIS","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,10]],"date-time":"2026-07-10T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1783641600000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"abstract":"<jats:p>Background: Caesarean section (CS) rates remain high globally, increasing healthcare costs and maternal-neonatal complications. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the Robson Ten Group Classification System (RTGCS) to assess and compare CS rates and reduce primary CS, which contributes to repeat procedures and associated risks. This study aimed to analyse indications for CS using RTGCS, maternal outcomes using WHO near-miss criteria, and pre- and post-delivery foetal conditions at a tertiary referral hospital.\nMethods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on CS deliveries in an African hospital from 01\u201330 June 2022. Data were analysed using bivariate and multivariate analysis with Fisher\u2019s exact test.\nResults: Of the 1,306 deliveries during the study period, 695 (53.2%) were CS. Robson Group 5 was the largest contributor (32.2%), followed by Groups 2 (16.4%) and 4 (12.8%). Foetal distress was the leading indication for CS (47.2%), followed by previous CS (declining vaginal birth after caesarean [VBAC]) (8.2%) and previous uterine scar \u00d7 2 in labour (5.8%). Mothers with a previous uterine scar accounted for 25.1% of all CSs, with 6.9% of them requiring high care. Maternal near-miss events occurred in 0.6% of cases. Group 5 had the highest maternal morbidity. Maternal risk factors that contributed to poor foetal outcome in this category were previous CS, chronic hypertension, gestational diabetes, poor obstetric history and obesity. Preoperatively, 62.4 % of foetuses had pathological non-stress tests (NSTs); 30.7% of NSTs were normal. Despite this, neonatal outcomes were favourable. Although no umbilical cord pH was done when the Apgar was &gt; 7, those babies were discharged and coped well in the ward. The stillbirth risk was 12 times higher (OR 12.10, CI 4.29\u201334.14, p &lt; 0.001) in women with adverse maternal outcomes, and low 5-min Apgar scores had a 6-fold increased odds in these women (OR 5.83, CI 2.79\u201312.18, p &lt; 0.001). Maternal near-miss events were strongly associated with adverse neonatal outcomes; the main causes of maternal near misses were peripartum haemorrhage and sepsis. Women who experienced a near-miss had 12 times the odds of stillbirth (OR 12.10, 95% CI 4.29 \u201334.14, p &lt; 0.001) and nearly six times the odds of a low Apgar score at 5 min (OR 5.83, 95% CI 2.79\u201312.18, p &lt; 0.001).\nConclusion: High CS rates reflect tertiary care burden, with the majority falling within Robson Group 5. This group was the most frequent contributor to CS, and foetal distress was the leading indication for CS.\nContribution: This was followed by factors related to previous uterine scars. Women with prior uterine scars frequently had a repeat CS and showed notable care needs. Although most foetuses had abnormal preoperative NSTs, overall neonatal outcomes were favourable. However, maternal near miss events, though rare, were strongly associated with significantly increased risks of stillbirth and poor neonatal outcomes. Strategies are needed to prevent primary CS, thus reducing maternal and perinatal morbidity.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.4102\/jcmsa.v4i1.325","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,9]],"date-time":"2026-07-09T07:19:16Z","timestamp":1783581556000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4102\/crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Maternal and foetal factors contributing to caesarean section rates at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital, a tertiary care centre in South Africa"],"prefix":"10.4102","volume":"4","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0008-8287-3433","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Linda C.","family":"Taptue Noumsi","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"id":[{"id":"https:\/\/ror.org\/03rp50x72","id-type":"ROR","asserted-by":"publisher"}],"name":"University of the Witwatersrand"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-9302-8218","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Evelyn Ngwa","family":"Lumngwena","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"id":[{"id":"https:\/\/ror.org\/03rp50x72","id-type":"ROR","asserted-by":"publisher"}],"name":"University of the Witwatersrand"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-1879-7137","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Poovangela","family":"Naidoo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"id":[{"id":"https:\/\/ror.org\/03rp50x72","id-type":"ROR","asserted-by":"publisher"}],"name":"University of the Witwatersrand"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"2580","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,10]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref0","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Toll\u00e5nes MC. Increased rate of caesarean sections \u2013 Causes and consequences. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2009;129(13):1329\u20131331. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4045\/tidsskr.08.0453","DOI":"10.4045\/tidsskr.08.0453"},{"key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Niekerk AV, Soma-Pillay P. Caesarean births: South Africa\u2019s rates are too high \u2013 They can be dangerous for mothers and babies. The Conversation [serial online]. 2024 [cited 2025 Jul 27]. Available from: http:\/\/theconversation.com\/caesarean-births-south-africas-rates-are-too-high-they-can-be-dangerous-for-mothers-and-babies-226516","DOI":"10.64628\/AAJ.mkcuhdk3k"},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Solanki GC, Cornell JE, Daviaud E, Fawcus S. Caesarean section rates in South Africa: A case study of the health systems challenges for the proposed National Health Insurance. S Afr Med J. 2020;110(8):747. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7196\/SAMJ.2020.v110i8.14699","DOI":"10.7196\/SAMJ.2020.v110i8.14699"},{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Antoine C, Young BK. Caesarean section one hundred years 1920\u20132020: The good, the bad and the ugly. J Perinat Med. 2021;49(1):5\u201316. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1515\/jpm-2020-0305","DOI":"10.1515\/jpm-2020-0305"},{"key":"ref4","unstructured":"NCCEMD. National committee for confidential enquiry into maternal deaths. Saving mothers 2017\u20132019 annual report on confidential inquiries into maternal deaths; in South Africa: Comprehensive report [homepage on the Internet]. 2020. Available from: https:\/\/www.health.gov.za\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Saving-Mothers-2017-2019-Technical-Report-FINAL-2-1.pdf"},{"key":"ref5","unstructured":"NCCEMD. National committee for confidential enquiry into maternal deaths. Saving mothers 2023 annual report on confidential enquiries into maternal deaths; in South Africa: Comprehensive report [homepage on the Internet]. 2023. Available from: https:\/\/knowledgehub.health.gov.za\/system\/files\/2024-02\/Executive%20%20Report%20%202020-2022%20Presentation%20Dr%20Sylvia%20Cebekulu_.pdf"},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Soma-Pillay P, Pattinson RC, Langa\u2013Mlambo L, Nkosi BSS, Macdonald AP. Maternal near miss and maternal death in the Pretoria Academic Complex, South Africa: A population-based study. S Afr Med J = Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif Vir Geneeskunde. 2015;105(7):578\u2013563. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7196\/SAMJnew.8038","DOI":"10.7196\/SAMJnew.8038"},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Guidozzi DF, Branch S, Chauke L. Maternal and fetal outcomes following delivery in a tertiary hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa. S Afr J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019;24(3):74. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7196\/sajog.1396","DOI":"10.7196\/sajog.1396"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sobhy S, Arroyo-Manzano D, Murugesu N, et al. Maternal and perinatal mortality and complications associated with caesarean section in low-income and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2019;393(10184):1973\u20131982. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S0140-6736(18)32386-9","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(18)32386-9"},{"key":"ref9","unstructured":"WHO. Robson classification: Implementation manual [homepage on the Internet]. 2017 [cited 2024 Nov 25]. Available from: https:\/\/www.who.int\/publications\/i\/item\/9789241513197"},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Tiwari M, Singh S, Kushwah BS. Robson\u2019s ten group classification: a tool for predicting caesarean section rates. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2023;12(3):595\u2013602.","DOI":"10.18203\/2320-1770.ijrcog20230297"},{"key":"ref11","unstructured":"FD Rubgega, Soma-Pillay P, Becker P. Caesarean section indications and outcomes at a tertiary level hospital in South Africa. Obstet Gynaecol Forum [serial online]. 2023 [cited 2023 Feb 10];31(3):8\u201311. Available from: https:\/\/www.ajol.info\/index.php\/ogf\/article\/view\/241391"},{"key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Radaf VE, Campos LN, Savona-Ventura C, Mahmood T, Zaigham M. Robson ten group classification system for caesarean sections across Europe: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Biol. 2025;305:178\u2013198. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2024.11.052","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2024.11.052"},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Betr\u00e1n A, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ, et al. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2015;123(5):667\u2013670. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/1471-0528.13526","DOI":"10.1111\/1471-0528.13526"},{"key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Pavlidou E, Antasouras G, Papadopoulou SK, et al. Association of maternal risk factors with the prevalence of caesarean section deliveries: A cross-sectional study. Med Sci. 2023;11(4):66. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/medsci11040066","DOI":"10.3390\/medsci11040066"},{"key":"ref15","unstructured":"RCOG. Birth after previous caesarean birth: Green-top guideline No. 45 [homepage on the Internet]. 2015 [cited 2025 Sep 04]; p. 1\u201331. Available from: https:\/\/www.rcog.org.uk\/guidance\/browse-all-guidance\/green-top-guidelines\/birth-after-previous-caesarean-birth-green-top-guideline-no-45\/"},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Varouxaki N, Gnanasambanthan S, Datta S, et al. Antepartum haemorrhage. Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med. 2018;28(8):237\u2013242. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ogrm.2018.07.001","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ogrm.2018.07.001"},{"key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Dound NC, Pajai S, Singh A. The correlation of intraoperative findings and foetal outcome in cases taken for caesarean section based on non-reassuring cardiotocographic changes \u2013 A review article. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2022;11(10):5894\u20135898. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4103\/jfmpc.jfmpc_440_22","DOI":"10.4103\/jfmpc.jfmpc_440_22"},{"key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"An H, Jin M, Li Z, et al. Impact of gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia on preterm birth in China: A large prospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2022;12(9):e058068. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2021-058068","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2021-058068"},{"key":"ref19","unstructured":"Velaphi SC, Mokhachane M, Mphahlele RM, Beckh-Arnold E, Kuwanda ML, Cooper PA. Survival of very-low-birth-weight infants according to birth weight and gestational age in a public hospital: original article. S Afr Med J. 2005;95(7):504\u2013509."},{"key":"ref20","unstructured":"World Health Organization (WHO). WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience: Summary. Geneva: WHO; 2018."},{"key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Gashaw A, Figa Z, Abebe Z, Demeke AD, Sime Y. Knowledge and utilization of obstetric ultrasound and associated factors among pregnant mother in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound J. 2025;17(1):1\u201314. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s13089-025-00420-w","DOI":"10.1186\/s13089-025-00420-w"},{"key":"ref22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Bishop D, Dyer RA, Maswime S, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after caesarean delivery in the African surgical outcomes study: A 7-day prospective observational cohort study. Lancet Glob Health. 2019;7(4):e513\u2013e522. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S2214-109X(19)30036-1","DOI":"10.1016\/S2214-109X(19)30036-1"}],"container-title":["Journal of the Colleges of Medicine of South Africa"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/jcmsa.org.za\/index.php\/jcmsa\/article\/view\/325\/1096","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,9]],"date-time":"2026-07-09T07:19:20Z","timestamp":1783581560000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/jcmsa.org.za\/index.php\/jcmsa\/article\/view\/325"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,10]]},"references-count":23,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,1]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4102\/jcmsa.v4i1.325","relation":{},"ISSN":["3105-4331","2960-110X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"3105-4331","type":"print"},{"value":"2960-110X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,10]]},"article-number":"a325"}}