Introduction: The promise and the challenge of IPE in Sudan
Interprofessional Education (IPE) is increasingly recognized as a pathway to safer, more coordinated patient care. In Sudan, however, the traditional model of isolated medical and health professional schools has created a disconnect between evolving healthcare needs and static educational systems. This misalignment raises questions about how best to introduce interprofessional collaboration in environments marked by curricular rigidity, resource constraints, and political–economic volatility.
Understanding the obstacles to IPE implementation in Sudan requires a careful look at institutional structures, learner readiness, and the broader context in which higher education operates. Recent cross-sectional data from Master of Health Professions Education cohorts across Sudan highlight key barriers and potential facilitators that can guide policy makers and educators toward actionable reforms.
Institutional barriers: Curricula, leadership, and resources
A predominant finding is that integrating IPE content into existing curricula remains a significant hurdle. About six in ten respondents (61.3%) viewed curriculum integration as challenging, with the issue showing statistically significant variation across colleges. The traditional, discipline‑specific curriculum emerged as a central impediment, with 78.2% perceiving it as a barrier and 14.9% neutral. This rigidity aligns with global observations that entrenched professional identities and institutional inertia slow reform efforts.
Most faculty members (96%) agreed that current learning approaches must adapt to facilitate IPE. The shift toward learner‑centered pedagogies—such as problem‑based learning, case discussions, simulations, and team projects—requires robust faculty development and investment in new teaching spaces and technologies. Yet resource limitations are pervasive: two in three participants (67.4%) identified inadequate funding as a potential barrier, and a large majority (82.2%) called for dedicated premises for IPE activities.
Administrative backing proved almost universal, with 98% of participants labeling leadership support as critical. The evidence is clear: strong management commitment—through policy adjustments, budget allocations, and calendar modifications—correlates with the sustainability of interprofessional initiatives. In Sudan’s context, this leadership is tested by political and economic instability and competing national priorities, which can delay reform and erode long‑term planning.
Learner and classroom challenges: Readiness, diversity, and attitudes
From a learner perspective, the data point to substantial diversity in knowledge, skills, and clinical exposure among students. About 70.3% of respondents believed that such heterogeneity creates obstacles to effective IPE participation. This finding is supported by concerns about differences in academic level, clinical exposure, and maturity, which can affect teamwork and mutual respect if not managed with thoughtful facilitation.
Early exposure to IPE is repeatedly suggested as a facilitator. Respondents emphasized clarifying objectives, outlining actionable plans, and cultivating problem‑solving and communication skills before or alongside IPE activities. Orientation programs for both students and staff are seen as essential, along with the idea of aligning students’ developmental stages (preclinical vs. clinical) to ease collaboration and reduce attitude‑related friction.
Infrastructure and staffing concerns also hinder progress. The shortage of trained personnel, combined with large student cohorts and insufficient physical spaces, undermines the delivery of interprofessional modules. Nearly all respondents (98%) underscored the importance of adequate staffing and ongoing professional development to ensure facilitators can guide collaborative learning effectively.
Strategic pathways: What Sudanese institutions can do
To move from aspiration to impact, Sudanese universities and colleges can adopt a multi‑pronged strategy that aligns curricular reform, resource allocation, and culture shift. Key steps include:
- Embed IPE modules within core curricula across faculties, with clearly defined competencies, assessment milestones, and cross‑disciplinary objectives.
- Invest in faculty development programs focused on interprofessional facilitation, teamwork, and simulation‑based learning.
- Secure dedicated funding and facilities for interprofessional activities, including simulation labs and collaborative spaces that encourage interaction.
- Develop leadership‑driven policies that support calendar adjustments, protected time for IPE activities, and incentives for faculty participation.
- Introduce early IPE exposure, pairing learners from diverse disciplines at preclinical or early clinical stages to foster mutual understanding and reduce stereotypes.
- Establish clear objectives, shared values, and role delineations to minimize conflicts and promote professional respect among students and staff.
Addressing these issues requires longitudinal evaluation to track attitudes, skill development, and, ultimately, patient outcomes. While cross‑sectional surveys provide valuable snapshots, ongoing monitoring and iterative refinement are essential to realizing the transformative potential of IPE in Sudan.
Conclusion: Building a resilient IPE landscape in a challenging context
Interprofessional Education holds substantial promise for improving adult health education and patient care in Sudan. Realizing this promise hinges on meticulous planning, targeted resource allocation, and unwavering institutional commitment. By reforming curricula, strengthening leadership, and investing in faculty and facilities, Sudan can harness the collaborative power of IPE to train health professionals who work together more effectively, ultimately improving health outcomes for communities.
Limitations and future directions
This study relies on self‑reported cross‑sectional data from a specific cohort, which may be subject to response and recall biases. Longitudinal research, broader stakeholder engagement including policymakers, and patient‑level outcomes will be valuable in confirming the impact of IPE reforms and refining implementation strategies.
