Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Grewia Gum 1: Some Mechanical and Swelling Properties of Compact and Film

Elijah I Nep1,2 , Barbara R Conway1,3

1Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham B4 7ET, United Kingdom; 2Department of Pharmaceutics and Pharm. Technology, University of Jos, Nigeria; 3Pharmacy, School of Applied Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield HD1 3DH, United Kingdom.

For correspondence:-  Elijah Nep   Email: nepeli2000@yahoo.com   Tel:+2348166116714

Received: 30 October 2010        Accepted: 8 June 2011        Published: 20 August 2011

Citation: Nep EI, Conway BR. Grewia Gum 1: Some Mechanical and Swelling Properties of Compact and Film. Trop J Pharm Res 2011; 10(4):385-392 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v10i4.3

© 2011 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To study the mechanical and dynamic swelling properties of grewia gum, evaluate its compression behaviour and determine the effect of drying methods on its properties.
Methods: Compacts (500 mg) of both freeze-dried and air-dried grewia gum were separately prepared by compression on a potassium bromide (KBr) press at different pressures and subjected to Heckel analysis. Swelling studies were performed using 200 mg compacts of the gum (freeze-dried or air-dried) compressed on a KBr press. The mechanical properties of the films of the gum prepared by casting 1 % dispersions of the gum were evaluated using Hounsfield tensiometer. The mechanical properties of grewia gum films were compared with films of pullulan and guar gum which were similarly prepared. The effect of temperature on the water uptake of the compacts was studied and the data subjected to Schott’s analysis.
Results: Drying conditions had no effect on the yield pressure of the gum compacts as both air-dried and freeze-dried fractions had a yield pressure of 322.6 MPa. The plots based on Schott’s equation for the grewia gum samples showed that both samples (freeze-dried and air-dried) exhibited long swelling times. Grewia gum film had a tensile strength of 19.22±3.61 MPa which was similar to that of pullulan films (p > 0.05). It had an elastic modulus of 2.13±0.12 N/mm2 which was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than those of pullulan and guar gum with elastic moduli of 3.33±0.00 and 2.86±0.00 N/mm2, respectively. 
Conclusion: The type of drying method used does not have any effect on the degree of plasticity of grewia gum compacts. Grewia gum obtained by either drying method exhibited extended swelling duration. Matrix tablet formulations of the gum will likely swell slowly and promote sustained release of drug.

Keywords: Grewia gum compact, Films, Heckel analysis, Swelling behaviour

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.523 (2021)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 39 (2021)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates