Objectives :To determine the content of ibuprofen whether it tally to the value
stated.
Procedures :
2. A
quantity of powder containing 0.5 g ibuprofen (0.977g) was extracted with 20 ml
chloroform for 15 minutes and filtered.
3. The
residuewas washed with 3 × 10 ml chloroform and gently the combined filtrate was
allowed to evaporate just to dryness in a current of air. The residue was
dissolved in 100 ml with ethanol (96%) previously neutralized to
phenolphthalein solution.
4. The
solution was titrated with 0.1M sodium hydroxide to end point with
phenolphthalein solution as the indicator. The content of ibuprofen was
calculated to determine that if each ml of 0.1M sodium hydroxide is equivalent
to 0.02063 g of C13H18O2.
Calculation
:
Weight
of weighing boat + powder (20 ibuprofen tablet)
|
10.9963g
|
Weight
of weighing boat
|
3.1796g
|
Weight
of powder (20 ibuprofen tablet)
|
7.8167g
|
Calculation
to get 0.5g ibuprofen,
1
tablet contains 200mg of ibuprofen and the other excipients.
Hence,
20 tablets contain 4000mg (4g) ibuprofen.
Thus, 0.9770g of powder was weighed and dissolved in
20ml chloroform.
Results
:
C13H18O2 +NaOH
C12H17COONa + H2O
The end point of titration= 14.6 mL
Number of mole of sodium hydroxide needed to react
with ibuprofen,
NNaOH= Volume x Molar Concentration
= 14.6mL x 0.1M
= 0.00146 mol
From the chemical equation,
Number of mole of ibuprofen Number of mole of sodium hydroxide used
NIbuprofen = 0.00146 mol
Mass of
ibuprofen,
MassIbuprofen= Number of mole x Molar mass of C13H18O2
=
0.00146mol x (13x12.01 + 18x 1.008 + 2x16.00)g mol-1
= 0.00146mol x206.274 g mol-1
=
0.30116 g
0.3012g
Discussion
:
From the experiment, 0.3012g of C13H18O2was neutralized by 14.6ml of 0.1M NaOH.
Percentage
of deviation =×100
= × 100
= × 100
= 60.24%
The
experimental value is highly
deviated from the
theoretical value, some random or systemic errors might occur. It is because
the acceptable range for the content deviation is between 85%- 115% but the
experimental value is only 60.24%. Supposedly, the experiment should be
repeated by using a new batch of ibuprofen as serious random or systemic error
might have occurred. However, due to time limitation, the experiment was not
repeated. For instance, fine powder of ibuprofen may escape as they are too
light and easily dispersed in the air. Hence, this may cause loss of active
ingredient in ibuprofen and affect the final result. Next, the fine powder
cannot be transferred completely from one apparatus to another (for example
from pestle to weighing boat), some powder may adhere to the inner wall of
apparatus and results in inaccurate amount of ibuprofen weighted. Other than
that, parallax error may occur during taking reading from the measuring
cylinder. Also, filter paper was used instead of sintered glass crucible.
Hence, the pore on filter paper might be bigger and allowed some excipients to
pass through and impure ibuprofen was extracted. Other than that, the ibuprofen
used was expired hence the active ingredient in it may degraded or spoiled.
This may affects the amount of sodium hydroxide needed to neutralize the impure
ibuprofen.
Those
errors can be avoided by improving the steps of carrying out the experiment. As
fine particle size of powder is a systemic error, repeating and averaging the
results can minimize the deviation and get a more precise result. Parallax
error can be eliminated by placing the eye at the position perpendicular to the
scale on measuring cylinder or burette. Sintered glass crucible should be used
to get the pure ibuprofen. New batch of ibuprofen should be used to eliminate
the problem of expired active ingredient.
Conclusion :
0.3012g of ibuprofen active ingredient was obtained from the ibuprofen
tablet. The content of active ingredient is not tally with the theoretical
dosage expected. The percentage of deviation should be in the range of 85%-115%
but the experimental value is 60.24%. The experiment should be repeated by
using a new batch of ibuprofen to determine whether it fall in the range of
75%-125% so that the result is acceptable.
Question 5
5.
Explain the difference found in the procedure for dissolution test in
United State Pharmacopoeia and the British Pharmacopoeia.
In dissolution test for
capsule, it was stated in USP uses the rotating paddle from about one-third of
its capsule products. The pharmacopoeias have attempted to overcome the problem
of capsules floating by the use of a sinker and there are differences in those
prescribed by the 3 major pharmacopoeias. The BP authorizes the use of one any
product that floats and it has the most precise specification for one. It is
constructed from an acid-resistant metal wire. The PhEur simply states that for
products that float when using apparatus no.2, a glass or metal helix should be
used to keep the dosage form horizontal at the bottom of the vessel. This
sinker must be made from substances that are chemically inert in the media for
it to be used in a dissolution test.