Ignite Creation Date:
2026-03-26 @ 3:20 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-03-31 @ 11:45 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT07401420
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2026-02-10
First Post:
2026-01-19
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Life Sustaining Treatments in Critically Ill Children
Sponsor:
Göteborg University
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Project Plan Physicians' Experiences of the Decision-making Process Regarding Decisions to Withhold/Discontinue Life-sustaining Treatment in Children Cared for in Intensive Care Units in Sweden. A Qualitative Study.
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2026-01
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
LST-Ped-Int
Brief Summary:
Summary of the Research on Withdrawing and Withholding Life-Sustaining Treatment for Critically Ill Children Background Medical treatments require regular evaluation to ensure they align with the patient's best interests, particularly in intensive care where quality of life is often compromised. In the context of critically ill children, the challenge increases as patients may not be fully conscious or capable of expressing their needs and preferences. While intensive care can extend life, end-of-life situations necessitate careful consideration to avoid providing futile treatments that do not benefit the patient.
Decision-Making Complexity Identifying when further treatment is beneficial poses significant challenges, influenced by various factors including the wishes of the patient and guardians. Previous studies indicate variability among healthcare providers in treatment decisions, often stemming from personal experiences and emotional responses. However, comparable research focusing on critically ill children in Nordic contexts remains scarce. Medical decisions often require balancing potential benefits against the risks of extended suffering or loss of valuable time at the end of life.
A previous survey on end-of-life care in Europe indicated similar attitudes across regions but highlighted the need for cultural considerations. Sweden's distinct social and cultural values, characterized by individualism and secularism, may influence practices surrounding life-sustaining treatment.
Research Aims This research aims to investigate the factors affecting decision-making regarding the withdrawal and withholding of life-sustaining treatments for critically ill children in Swedish and Nordic intensive care units (ICUs). It will examine practitioners' experiences, attitudes, and the relative impact of children's autonomy in these decisions, excluding neonatal care.
Key scientific questions focus on Physicians' attitudes and challenges regarding treatment withdrawal.
Methodology
Semi-structured interviews in multiple ICUs to explore ethical dilemmas faced by physicians.
Decision-Making Complexity Identifying when further treatment is beneficial poses significant challenges, influenced by various factors including the wishes of the patient and guardians. Previous studies indicate variability among healthcare providers in treatment decisions, often stemming from personal experiences and emotional responses. However, comparable research focusing on critically ill children in Nordic contexts remains scarce. Medical decisions often require balancing potential benefits against the risks of extended suffering or loss of valuable time at the end of life.
A previous survey on end-of-life care in Europe indicated similar attitudes across regions but highlighted the need for cultural considerations. Sweden's distinct social and cultural values, characterized by individualism and secularism, may influence practices surrounding life-sustaining treatment.
Research Aims This research aims to investigate the factors affecting decision-making regarding the withdrawal and withholding of life-sustaining treatments for critically ill children in Swedish and Nordic intensive care units (ICUs). It will examine practitioners' experiences, attitudes, and the relative impact of children's autonomy in these decisions, excluding neonatal care.
Key scientific questions focus on Physicians' attitudes and challenges regarding treatment withdrawal.
Methodology
Semi-structured interviews in multiple ICUs to explore ethical dilemmas faced by physicians.
Detailed Description:
Summary of the Research on Withdrawing and Withholding Life-Sustaining Treatment for Critically Ill Children Background Medical treatments require regular evaluation to ensure they align with the patient's best interests, particularly in intensive care where quality of life is often compromised. In the context of critically ill children, the challenge increases as patients may not be fully conscious or capable of expressing their needs and preferences. While intensive care can extend life, end-of-life situations necessitate careful consideration to avoid providing futile treatments that do not benefit the patient.
Decision-Making Complexity Identifying when further treatment is beneficial poses significant challenges, influenced by various factors including the wishes of the patient and guardians. Previous studies indicate variability among healthcare providers in treatment decisions, often stemming from personal experiences and emotional responses. However, comparable research focusing on critically ill children in Nordic contexts remains scarce. Medical decisions often require balancing potential benefits against the risks of extended suffering or loss of valuable time at the end of life.
A previous survey on end-of-life care in Europe indicated similar attitudes across regions but highlighted the need for cultural considerations. Sweden's distinct social and cultural values, characterized by individualism and secularism, may influence practices surrounding life-sustaining treatment.
Research Aims This research aims to investigate the factors affecting decision-making regarding the withdrawal and withholding of life-sustaining treatments for critically ill children in Swedish and Nordic intensive care units (ICUs). It will examine practitioners' experiences, attitudes, and the relative impact of children's autonomy in these decisions, excluding neonatal care.
Key scientific questions focus on Physicians' attitudes and challenges regarding treatment withdrawal.
Methodology
Semi-structured interviews in multiple ICUs to explore ethical dilemmas faced by physicians.The research question will be investigated through semi-structured individual interviews with physicians who work with children in intensive care units. This will include both intensive care specialists and physicians from other specialties, primarily pediatricians. Recruitment will involve contacting the four children's departments in Sweden to seek voluntary study participants. The children's clinics at the same hospitals will also be contacted to reach out to potential volunteers. Recruitment will thereafter proceed through repeated contact and snowballing, where interviewed participants will assist in the recruitment process.An interview guide will be created and piloted with three people for validation. Subsequently, the interview guide will be updated.
The interviews will be conducted via links and verbatim transcription with the help of speech recognition software, which will be connected to the interviewer during the interview. Analysis will occur in NVivo using Qualitative Content Analysis according to Granheim and Lundman, based on narrative theory.
Decision-Making Complexity Identifying when further treatment is beneficial poses significant challenges, influenced by various factors including the wishes of the patient and guardians. Previous studies indicate variability among healthcare providers in treatment decisions, often stemming from personal experiences and emotional responses. However, comparable research focusing on critically ill children in Nordic contexts remains scarce. Medical decisions often require balancing potential benefits against the risks of extended suffering or loss of valuable time at the end of life.
A previous survey on end-of-life care in Europe indicated similar attitudes across regions but highlighted the need for cultural considerations. Sweden's distinct social and cultural values, characterized by individualism and secularism, may influence practices surrounding life-sustaining treatment.
Research Aims This research aims to investigate the factors affecting decision-making regarding the withdrawal and withholding of life-sustaining treatments for critically ill children in Swedish and Nordic intensive care units (ICUs). It will examine practitioners' experiences, attitudes, and the relative impact of children's autonomy in these decisions, excluding neonatal care.
Key scientific questions focus on Physicians' attitudes and challenges regarding treatment withdrawal.
Methodology
Semi-structured interviews in multiple ICUs to explore ethical dilemmas faced by physicians.The research question will be investigated through semi-structured individual interviews with physicians who work with children in intensive care units. This will include both intensive care specialists and physicians from other specialties, primarily pediatricians. Recruitment will involve contacting the four children's departments in Sweden to seek voluntary study participants. The children's clinics at the same hospitals will also be contacted to reach out to potential volunteers. Recruitment will thereafter proceed through repeated contact and snowballing, where interviewed participants will assist in the recruitment process.An interview guide will be created and piloted with three people for validation. Subsequently, the interview guide will be updated.
The interviews will be conducted via links and verbatim transcription with the help of speech recognition software, which will be connected to the interviewer during the interview. Analysis will occur in NVivo using Qualitative Content Analysis according to Granheim and Lundman, based on narrative theory.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: