Sunday, 2 April 2017

THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF PEG ON THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SUPPOSITORY

TITLE : THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF PEG ON THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SUPPOSITORY

INTRODUCTION :
            Suppository is a small solid preparation shaped to be inserted into the orifices of the body other than oral cavity. This preparation is usually inserted in the rectum, vagina and urethra. Suppository are usually medicated and solid at room temperature but melts at body temperature. Medicament that are being incorporated in the suppository bases are usually intended to give the patient either local or systemic effect. Suppositories are usually being used to relief constipation, pain, itching and inflammation.
            Commonly used suppository bases are Theobroma oil, glycerinated glycerine hydrogenated vegetable oil and polyethylene glycol. In this experiment, we are using polyethylene glycol (PEG) as the suppository base. PEG is being used as they are chemically stable, non-irritating, miscible with water and mucus secretion. The advantage of using PEG is that they do not melt at body temperature and it dissolve to provide a prolonged released than Theobroma oil.

OBJECTIVES :
1.      To calibrate suppository mould with EG before preparing medicated suppositories.
2.   To determine the effect of different compositions of PEG base on the physical characteristics of suppositories.

APPARATUS :
Analytical balance
Water bath at 37ºC
Hotplate
4 × 50 mL beaker
1 × 5 mL pipette and pipette bulb
1 × 5 mL measuring cylinder
2 × suppository mold set
Spatula
4 × weighing boats
2 × glass rods

MATERIALS :
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) 1000
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) 6000
Paracetamol
Distilled water
Liquid paraffin

PROCEDURES :
a)      Calibration of Suppository Molds with PEG Base
10g of the proportions between PEG 1000 and PEG 6000 were being used for the calibration experiment.

Ingredients
Percentage
Weight basis
PEG 1000
60%
6g
PEG 6000
40%
4g
1.      A clean and dry mold was took out and the mold was ensured not to be lubricated.
2.      PEG 1000 was melt on the hot plate. After that, the melt PEG 1000 was moved away from the hot plate for a short period to reduce its temperature and mixed with another PEG.
3.      The mixture was removed completely from the hot plate and allowed to cool before being poured into the mold.
4.      The cavities in the mold were being overfilled with the mixture. It was then left at room temperature until solidified.
5.      A hot spatula was being used to remove the excess and the suppositories were remove from the mold.
6.      The suppositories were weighed and the total weight was recorded. The average suppositories weight was calculated.
b)     Preparation of Paracetamol Suppositories
1.      Saturated stock of paracetamol was being prepared by adding 10g of paracetamol in 15 mL of distilled water.
2.     Paracetamol suppository (10g) was being prepared by using the following formulation:

Suppository
PEG 1000 (g)
PEG 6000 (g)
Paracetamol stock solution (mL)
Total (g)
I
9
0
1
10
II
6
3
1
10
III
0
9
1
10
3.      One type of PEG was left to melt on the hot plate, then reduce it and mixed with another PEG.
4.      The mixture was removed from the heat and allowed to cool before being poured into the mold.
5.      The cavities in the mold were being overfilled with the mixture and left to solidified at room temperature.
6.      The excess was then removed by using a hot spatula. The suppositories were then removed from the mold.
7.      The shape, texture, and colour of the suppositories were being observed.
8.      Each of the suppositories were being placed in a separate beaker containing distilled water (10 mL and pre-warmed at 37ºC).
9.      The time for the suppositories to melt was recorded.

RESULT
Description/Suppository
I
II
III
Shape
Bullet
Bullet
Bullet
Texture
Greasy
Slightly greasy
Smooth
Colour
Clear white
Cloudy white
Solid white
Time taken to melt(min)
49.00min
32.49min
42.03min


DISCUSSION
1.      Describe the important of calibrating suppository mould before preparing medicated suppository.

The experiment is started firstly by calibrating the suppository mould. It is important for the suppository mould to be calibrated to ensure accurate dosing. Sometimes there are slight differences between moulds and even the cavities within a mould. The mould is calibrated using the base alone, which in this experiment, the bases used are PEG 1000 and PEG 6000. The products are weighed and the mean weight is taken as true capacity. The mould used produce six suppositories, the weight of the product is 5.906g and the mean weight (which is assumed as the true capacity) is 0.9843g.
2.      Compare the physical appearance of suppositories that are formed and discuss.

The shape of the suppositories produced is all bullet-shaped because of the type of the mould used. Based on the observation, the difference in the composition of the base gives varieties to the physical appearance of each suppository.
From suppository I to III, the composition of PEG 6000 is increasing while PEG 1000 is decreasing. When the composition of PEG 1000 is high, the suppositories produced are softer and the strength is low. The melting point of PEG 1000 is 37-40C. It will melt when inserted into rectum, which is at the human body temperature, 37.5C.Suppository I is greasy and the smoothness is high.
Suppositories which contain high composition of PEG 6000 is a bit harder and not greasy. The strength of these suppositories is greater. This is because increasing content of PEG 6000 increases the number of hydrogen bonds between the molecules. The melting point of PEG 6000 is 60-63C, thus theoretically the suppositories with high composition of PEG 6000 is not easily melt at human body temperature. Suppository III is less greasy and the smoothness is low. The intensity of white colour of the suppositories, from suppository I to III, is increasing. This is due to the increasing content of PEG 6000 which gives the whitish properties to the product.

3.      Plot a graph of time required to melt the suppository vs. the amount of PEG 6000 in the formulation. Compare and explain the results.

PEG amount (g)
0
3
9
Time (min)
49.0
32.49
42.03


Graph 1

The graph shows the time required for suppositories to melt versus the amount of PEG 6000 in the formulation. The melting point was influenced by the molecular weight of the PEG. The bigger the molecular weight, the higher the melting point. Generally, PEG 1000 has a lower melting point compared to PEG 6000. Melting point of PEG of the same molecular weight will vary as their amounts were manipulated.
 In this experiment, suppository III has a higher melting point compared to Suppository II because it has more amount of PEG 6000. The melting point gathered from the experiment for suppository III is 49.00 minutes compared to 32.49 minutes for suppository II.
However, the suppository II shows a lower melting point compared to the suppository I although it contains more PEG 6000 which is 42.03 minutes. This could happen due to some errors during the experiment. Firstly, the formulation were heated too long during the compounding. Correspondingly, the melting point of the suppository will be affected. Other than that, the temperature of the water bath was not kept constant. Finally, the recorded time taken for the suppositories to melt were the reading when they were completely dissolved. We were supposed to take the time taken as soon as the suppositories started to melt.
Thus, the data collected has been biased from the theoretical data and some precaution steps should be taken before doing this experiment. The temperature of water bath should be keep constant by monitoring the temperature continuously and the time taken for the suppositories to dissolve should be start as soon as the suppository being place in the beaker containing distilled water and stop as soon as it start to dissolve.

4.      Describe function(s) of each ingredients used in the suppository formulation.
The ingredients used in the suppository formulation include paracetamol and Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) polymers which is PEG 1000 and PEG 6000. The paracetamol acts as the active ingredient in the preparation. It is the main substance in the drug formulation that are used intended to furnish pharmacological activity in the treatment of disease or to affect the function of the body. Next, both Peg 1000 and PEG 6000 work as suppository bases. PEG have received much attention as suppository bases because they possess many desirable properties. They are chemically stable, non-irritating, miscible with water and mucous secretions, and can be formulated, either by moulding or compression, in a wide range of hardness and melting point. In this experiment, the formulas of the suppository contained various proportions of PEG 1000 and PEG 6000 in order to yield a finished product that can be tested for hardness and dissolution time. The desired solidity of final products can be adjusted by mixing appropriate molecular weight and suitable ratio of PEG.
CONCLUSION
The different amount of combination of PEG 1000 and PEG 6000 in the suppository preparation affects the physical characteristics e.g. greasiness texture, and shape of the suppository as well as the rate of release of the active ingredient.

REFERENCE

PREPARED BY
Prasannah a/p Govindan  A153129
Wan Nur Husnul Khatimah binti Wan Mansor  A152352
Nur Shahirah binti Ishak  A153147
Nina Athirah binti Hasinin  A152865
Tasneem bt Mahayudin  A152348
Mohd Faiz bin Abd Latif  A153049

Friday, 9 December 2016

PRACTICAL 3 ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY OF TABLETS AND CAPSULES

Experiment 1 : Physical Appearance

Procedure
1.      A random tablet and capsule were randomly picked from the provided samples. The shape, colour, diameter and other physical characteristics were examined from the sample assigned.

Result



Tablet


Capsule


Colour

White


White and red

Shape


Round

Caplet

Marking


RMB



Line


Has a line which can separates the tablet into half


_

Branding


Pharmaniaga

Pharmaniaga
Diameter
0.91 cm
0.70 cm
Length
-
2.12 cm
Hardness
Harder
Hard
Thickness
0.4 cm
-

Discussion

            Tablet is being defined as circular in shape with either flat or convex faces and prepared by compressing the medicament or mixture of medicaments, usually with added substances. While capsule is being defined as an edible packaging made from gelatin which is filled with medicines to produce a unit dose and is mainly being used orally. Every capsule has different colour, size, marking and shape for their identification. These identifications help in preventing patient from taking the wrong drugs for their treatment. The diameter, length and thickness of the capsule and tablet were measured using a Vernier calliper. Vernier calliper is being used to measured these properties to obtained an accurate result as Vernier calliper has an accurate measurement of two decimal places. The line present in the middle of the tablet indicates that the tablet is allowed to be separated into half. Thus, we can conclude that both tablet and capsule are different in their physical appearance even though their main aim is to deliver drug to its site of action.
            There are several advantages and disadvantages of using capsule and tablet to deliver drug. The advantage of using a tablet is that it is easy to be swallowed rather than tablet. However, the disadvantage of capsule is that their contents are bulkier compared to tablet and capsule also have a short half-life compared to tablet. Next, tablet can easily be split into two due to the presence of the notches in the middle of the tablet. This will makes it easier for patient to split the tablet dose. The disadvantage of tablet is that tablet has a poor dissolution. We can conclude that each type of oral delivery drug has different advantages and disadvantages due to their physical appearance.

Experiment 2 Uniformity of diameter, thickness and hardness

Procedure
1.      10 tablets were selected  and test for uniformity of diameter, thickness and hardness was carried out using Tablet Testing Instrument (PHARMATEST PTB 311)
2.      The diameter of individual unit from the mean diameter of less than 12.5 and ±3% for diameter of 12.5mm or more.

Result
Tablets
Thickness(mm)
Hardness(N)
Diameter
Length(mm)
Deviation(%)
1
5.44
132.46
13.12
0
2
5.49
118.79
13.17
+0.38
3
5.54
184.01
13.11
-0.08
4
5.48
167.38
13.12
0
5
5.44
141.15
13.12
0
6
5.47
161.84
13.10
-0.15
7
5.49
161.84
13.11
-0.08
8
5.44
139.67
13.13
+0.08
9
5.46
135.60
13.11
-0.08
10
5.45
102.53
13.12
0
Mean
13.12


Discussion
            Tablet test for uniformity of thickness, diameter and hardness was carried of to ensure the consistency of these traits. This is very important and become one of the vital test before a batch of tablet being marketted to the consumer. Based on the experiment, all the tablet selected have the deviation value below ±3% which means all of the tablet are valid to be taken by consumer.
            Before conducting the experiment, samples were taken from the bulk packaged tablets and  was kept aside before examine them using Tablet Testing Instrument. This type of packaging was considered quite unsuitable for this experiment due to the tablet might hit with each other of the wall of the container which result in parts of the tablets detached as small fragments and causing in the reduction in size of the tablets. Apart fro that, the pressence of  moisture from the surrounding also affect the tablet properties.
            It is strongly suggested that the samples must be taken from Unit-of-Use packaged tablets. Apart from the tablet are unable to move freely,they are also kept from moisture which can affect the result obtained.

Experiment 3      Tablet friability

Procedure
1.      10 tablets were selected and weighed.
2.      All the tablets are being put into the drum of the tablet abration and friability tester. The rate of rotation which is 25 rpm, time to 10 minutes have been set and the operation was started.
3.      At the end of the operation, all the tablets were removed and ensured freedom from dust or powder by using the brush. The tablets were reweight. The percentage loss of weight was determined.
4.      Compressed tablet should nor lose more than 1 od its weight.

Result
Initial weight (g)
5.7604
Final weight (g)
5.7306
Difference in mass (g)
0.0298

Percentage loss of weight,
0.52%




Discussion
The strength of a tablet plays a very important role in its marketing and dissolution. The mechanical strength of tablet or granules can be determined by its hardness and through friability test. In friability test, the tablets are prone to abrasion hence enable to check for the tablet strength under application of force in different manner. In this experiment, Roche friabilator was used to stimulate the conditions that the product will be exposed to during the process of production. This test is a method to determine physical strength of uncoated tablets upon exposure to mechanical shock and attrition. Conventional compressed tablet that lose less than 1 of weight are considered acceptable. Based on the result of the friability test that has been done, the percentage of weight loss of the tablet is 0.52, meaning that the tablet used has passed the quality assessment of friability. One of the precautions that should be consider during friability test is the condition of the friabilator which can affected the result. For instance, punches that are in poor condition or worn out at their surface edges will result in ‘whiskering’ at the tablet edge and show higher than normal friability values.

Conclusion
            Through this practical, we were able to demonstrate some of quality tests required by referring to official pharmacopoeias as a guideline. The assessment of quality of tablets and capsules are important in the design of tablets and to monitor product quality. There are various standards that have been set in the various pharmacopoeias regarding the quality of pharmaceutical tablets. These include the uniformity of diameter, size, shape, thickness, weight, hardness, disintegration and dissolution characters. These properties are important since chemical breakdown or interactions between tablet components may alter the physical tablet properties, and greatly affect the bioavailability of the tablet system.

Experiment 4      Uniformity of weight of tablets and capsules.

Procedure

Tablets
1.      20 tablets which were previously selected at random were weighed. The average weight were determined.
2.      The tablets were weighed individually and the percentage deviation of its weight was determined from the average weight for each tablet.
3.      The deviation of individual weight from the average weight should not exceed the limits given below.
Average weight of tablet
Deviation (%)
Number of tablets
Less than 80 mg.
 10.0
Minimum 18

 20.0
Maximum 2
80 mg to 250 mg
 7.5
Minimum 18

 15.0
Maximum 2
More than 250 mg.
 5.0
Minimum 18

 10.0
Maximum 2

Capsules
1.      20 capsules were selected at random.
2.      One capsule was weighed. Capsule was opened and the contents were removed as completely as possible. The emptied shells were weighed. The net weight of its contents, that is by subtracting the weight of the shells from the weight of the intact capsule were determined.
3.      The procedure was repeated with other 19 capsules.
4.      The average net weight was determined from the sum of the individual net weights.
5.      The percentage deviation was determined from the average net weight for each capsule. The deviation of individual net weight should not exceed the limits given below:
Average net weight of capsule
Deviation (%)
Number of tablets
Less than 300 mg.
 10.0
Minimum 18

 20.0
Maximum 2
300 mg or more
 7.5
Minimum 18

 15.0
Maximum 2




Results
Tablets
Average weight = 0.6569 g
No.
Weight (g)
Deviation from average (%)
1

a
0.6530
-0.590
2
0.6523
-0.700
3
0.6467
-1.550
4
0.6741
2.620
5
0.6741
2.620
6
0.6477
-1.400
7
0.6515
-0.820
8
0.6763
2.950
9
0.6549
-0.300
10
0.6679
1.670
11
0.6588
0.280
12
0.6575
0.090
13
0.6637
1.040
14
0.6577
0.120
15
0.6532
-0.560
16
0.6471
-1.490
17
0.6382
-2.850
18
0.6550
-0.290
19
0.6487
-1.250
20
0.6570
0.015

Capsules
Average net weight = 0.3876 g
No.
Total weight (g)
Shell weight (g)
Net weight (g)
Deviation from average (%)
1
0.4654
0.0786
0.3868
-0.206
2
0.4702
0.0788
0.3914
0.980
3
0.4708
0.0760
0.3948
1.858
4
0.4703
0.0766
0.3937
1.574
5
0.4719
0.0765
0.3954
2.012
6
0.4763
0.0785
0.3978
2.632
7
0.4176
0.0758
0.3418
-11.82
8
0.4687
0.0750
0.3937
1.574
9
0.4769
0.0798
0.3971
2.451
10
0.4689
0.0742
0.3947
1.832
11
0.4599
0.0733
0.3866
-0.258
12
0.4672
0.0781
0.3891
0.387
13
0.4560
0.0735
0.3825
-1.316
14
0.4691
0.0780
0.3911
0.903
15
0.4697
0.0776
0.3921
1.161
16
0.4557
0.0791
0.3766
-2.838
17
0.4479
0.0743
0.3736
-3.612
18
0.4621
0.0792
0.3829
-1.213
19
0.4623
0.0745
0.3878
0.052
20
0.4770
0.0748
0.4022
3.767





Questions

1.      What are the objectives of the tests for uniformity of diameter and uniformity of content?

The objective of the tests for uniformity of diameter is to increase the quality of product appearance so the patient’s compliance could be increase, as well as to prevent any confusion from the patient towards the dosage of the medication. On the other hand, the objective of the tests for uniformity of content is to ensure uniform dosage is supplied to the patient so that overdose cases due to non-uniform amount of active ingredients in capsules or tablets can be prevented.

2.      State the types of tablets and capsules that must be tested for uniformity of diameter and uniformity of content.

Uniformity of diameter tests involves all uncoated and coated tablets, soft and hard capsules but it is not applicable for enteric tablets and sugar-coated tablets. For uniformity of content tests, all tablets are involved.

3.      Why is it important that tablets and capsules have uniform weight and content?

It is important that tablets and capsules have uniform weight and content to ensure that the patients take a precise pharmaceutical dose. For example in tablet splitting practice, uniform weight and content of tablets and capsules is important to ensure every obtained halves contain required strength. Uneven splitting of a tablet product may result in fluctuations of the administered dose, where this problem could be clinically significant especially for drugs with a narrow therapeutic range.

4.      Give reasons for the non-compliance to test for uniformity of weight.

- Uneven feeding of granules into the die.
- Irregular movement of the lower punch causing variation in capacity die space.

5.      Explain why is it beneficial for any tablets or capsules to have distinctive or identifying features.

Tablets and capsules need to have identifying features to help patients identify and understand their medication easily. The appearance of a tablet or capsule may influence the first impression of the patient. Tablets or capsules must have identification which is relevant to its indication. By this way, medication errors can be reduced, correct usage of drug can be increased and treatment cost can be saved.


Discussion

For tablets, since the average weight is 656.9 mg, so the deviation of the individual tablet net weight should not exceed the limits given:
Average weight of tablet
Deviation (%)
Number of tablets
More than 250 mg.
± 5.0
Minimum 18

± 10.0
Maximum 2

From the results obtained, all of the 20 tablets tested have the deviation range of ±5.0%, which follows the limits given. Hence all tablets are considered as uniform in the form of weight.
For capsules, the average net weight is 387.6 mg, so the deviation of an individual capsule should not exceed the limits given:
Average net weight of capsule
Deviation (%)
Number of tablets
300 mg or more
± 7.5
Minimum 18

± 15.0
Maximum 2




From the results, of 20 capsules tested, 19 capsules have deviation range of ±7.5% while 1 capsule has deviation range of ±15.0%. The results obey the limits given which considers that the capsules have uniform weight. However, some errors might arise during the experiment which causes slight inconsistency to the result. Some powders might still get stuck inside the capsule shells and the powders are not completely removed, thus cause the measurement of emptied shells not accurate. Besides, systematic error caused by the inaccuracy of weighing balance may have influenced the results. Environmental factors such as wind from the air-conditioning may also cause the fluctuation in the value represented by the weighing balance.
The uniformity of weight of tablets and capsules may be due to the good manufacturing practice (GMP) applied by the manufacturing company.

Conclusion
The tablets and capsules tested have passed the weight uniformity test.


Experiment 5: Content of Ibuprofen (assay)

Procedure
1. Powder containing 0.5 g Ibuprofen was extracted with 20 mL chloroform for 15
    minutes and filtered through sintered glass crucible.
2. The residue was washed with 3×10 mL chloroform and the combined filtrate was
    gently evaporated just to dryness in a current of air. The residue was dissolved in
    100 mL ethanol (96%) that was previously neutralized to phenolphthalein solution.
3. The solution was titrated with 0.1M sodium hydroxide to end point with
    phenolphthalein solution as the indicator.
4. The content of ibuprofen is calculated with each mL of 0.1M sodium hydroxide,
    NaOH is equivalent to 0.02063g of C13H18O2.

Result
Weight of Ibuprofen powder: 10.97 g
Volume of NaOH used to achieve end point = 11.2 mL

1 tablet of Ibuprofen = 400 mg
For 20 tablets of Ibuprofen = 20 × 400 mg
                                           = 8000 mg
                                           = 8 g

To obtain 0.5 g of Ibuprofen
The weight of Ibuprofen : The weight of Ibuprofen powder
                                 8 g : 10.97 g
                                 x g : 0.5 g

The weight of Ibuprofen =  
                                       = 0.6872 g

NaoH + C13H18O C13H17ONa + H2O
1 mol of NaoH = 1 mol of C13H18O2
No. of mole of NaoH = MV
                                 = (0.1)(11.2×10-3)
                                 =1.12×10-3 mol
Hence, 1 mol of C13H18O2 = 1.12×10-3 mol

Each mL of NaOH is equivalent to 0.02063 g
= 11.2 × 0.02063
= 0.2311 g Ibuprofen

Calculation for assay =
                                   =
                                   = 46.22%

Discussion

From the experiment, the obtained weight of Ibuprofen is 0.2311g. This amount is slightly different from the actual weight that is 0.5 g. The difference between the experimental and theoretical values could happens due to some errors during the experiment is conducted.
Firstly, the ibuprofen that was used may had expired. Loss of active ingredients in the tablets may occur due to decomposition process. Therefore, unexpired Ibuprofen should be used to increase the accuracy of the experiment. Besides, loss of active ingredient can also occur due to the drying of solution. The solution may not dry completely.
Moreover, some of the tablets do not break completely. The tablets should be crushed completely to avoid loss of Ibuprofen. Besides, the solution are not filtered through a sintered glass crucible but using filter funnel and filter paper. This will cause some of the powder that do not dissolved in the chloroform to pass through the conical flask.

Conclusion
As a conclusion, the content of Ibuprofen from the experiment is 0.2331 g which is slightly different with theoretical value, 0.5 g. This can happen due to some errors during the experiment is conducted.

Reference

Abdel Naser Zaid et. al. Weight and content uniformity of lorazepam half-tablets: A study of correlation of a low drug content product.

Neha et al. 2015. Evaluation of Quality Control Parameterson Various Brand of Paracetamol Tablet Formulation. World Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences. 4(7): 976-984
WHO. Revision of monograph on tablets, Final text for addition to The International Pharmacopoeia. March 2011.