摘要
目的对非水滴定和非水电位滴定法测定福尔可定的含量进行比较。方法均以冰醋酸为溶剂,非水滴定法采用结晶紫作为指示剂指示滴定终点,电位滴定法测定以第二个滴定突跃为滴定终点,两法均对滴定结果进行空白校正。结果电位滴定法滴定突跃明显,测定出的3批实际样品含量高于非水滴定的结果。结论因非水电位滴定法操作简单、滴定突跃明显,相较于非水滴定法能更好地控制福尔可定的质量。
Objective To compare potentiometric titration with non-aqueous titration method for determination of pholcodine.Methods Pholcodine was dissolved in the glacial acetic acid.The non-aqueous titration used crystal violet solution to indicate titration end point,and the potentiometric titration method with the second abrupt change as the end-point.The results of both titration methods need to be blank-correction.Results The results of potentiometric titration were higher than the results of non-aqueous titration method.Conclusion It is better to choose potentiometric titration to control the quantitative of pholcodine than non-aqueous titration.
出处
《中国药事》
CAS
2011年第4期375-376,共2页
Chinese Pharmaceutical Affairs
关键词
福尔可定
非水电位滴定
非水滴定
pholcodine
potentiometric titration
non-aqueous titration
