Preprocedural oxygenation (pre-emptive oxygenation started during presedation and/or induction) and procedural oxygenation (pre-emptive oxygenation started during any phase of sedation) are easy-to-use strategies with potential to decrease adverse events. Here, we describe practice patterns of preprocedural oxygenation and procedural oxygenation. We hypothesized that patients who received preprocedural oxygenation or procedural oxygenation would have a lower risk of airway/breathing/circulation interventions during sedation compared with patients without procedural oxygenation. We performed a retrospective, multicenter, cross-sectional study of pediatric sedations from April 2020 to July 2023 using the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium multicenter database. The patient-level and sedation-level characteristics were described using frequencies and proportions, stratified by preprocedural oxygenation and procedural oxygenation status. We determined the site-level frequency of preprocedural oxygenation and procedural oxygenation use. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to calculate the risk difference for interventions associated with preprocedural oxygenation and procedural oxygenation. This study included a total of 85,599 pediatric sedations; 43,242 (50.5%) patients received preprocedural oxygenation (used oxygen before sedation and/or at induction) and a total of 52,219 (61.0%) received procedural oxygenation pre-emptively at any time during the sedation. There was no statistical difference in overall interventions with either preprocedural oxygenation (risk difference −0.06%; 95% confidence interval −4.26% to 4.14%) or procedural oxygenation (risk difference −1.07%; 95% confidence interval −6.44% to 4.30%). Pre-emptive preprocedural oxygenation and procedural oxygenation were not associated with a difference in the use of airway/breathing/circulation interventions in pediatric sedations.

中文翻译：

---

程序前氧合和儿科程序镇静期间的程序氧合：使用模式以及与干预措施的关联


程序前氧合（在镇静前和/或诱导期间开始预先氧合）和程序氧合（在镇静任何阶段开始预先氧合）是易于使用的策略，有可能减少不良事件。在这里，我们描述了术前氧合和程序氧合的实践模式。我们假设，与未接受程序氧合的患者相比，接受程序前氧合或程序氧合的患者在镇静期间接受气道/呼吸/循环干预的风险较低。我们使用儿科镇静研究联盟多中心数据库对 2020 年 4 月至 2023 年 7 月期间的儿科镇静进行了回顾性、多中心、横断面研究。使用频率和比例描述患者水平和镇静水平特征，并按术前氧合和术中氧合状态进行分层。我们确定了术前氧合和程序氧合使用的现场频率。我们使用治疗加权的逆概率来计算与术前氧合和术中氧合相关的干预措施的风险差异。这项研究总共纳入了 85,599 名儿童镇静剂； 43,242 名患者 (50.5%) 接受了术前氧合（镇静前和/或诱导时使用氧气），总共 52,219 名患者 (61.0%) 在镇静期间的任何时间预先接受了程序氧合。术前氧合（风险差−0.06%；95%置信区间−4.26%至4.14%）或术中氧合（风险差−1.07%；95%置信区间−6.44%至4.30%）的总体干预没有统计学差异）。 抢先性术前氧合和程序性氧合与儿科镇静中气道/呼吸/循环干预的使用差异无关。