煎药机与传统煎药法制备的清热除湿汤质量比较研究  

Comparative study on the quality of Qingre Chushi Decoction prepared by traditional decoction and machine decoction

作　　者：范峥[1] 董永强[1] 肖薇[1] 刘洋[1] 王宏蕾[1] 郭桂明[1] 

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学附属北京中医医院药学部,北京100010

出　　处：《北京中医药》2015年第12期982-985,共4页Beijing Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine

基　　金：北京中医医院院级课题(2013-25;2014YM-17);国家中医药管理局"十二五"重点专科临床中药学建设项目(ZP0101YX001)

摘　　要：目的评价煎药机和传统煎药法所得清热除湿汤剂的质量。方法用煎药机煎煮和传统煎药方法制备清热除湿汤药液,比较2种方法所得药液的干浸膏得率,以及龙胆苦苷和黄芩苷的转移率。结果煎药机制备药液干浸膏得率9.84%,传统煎药法制备药液干浸膏得率17.42%;煎药机制备药液中龙胆苦苷转移率67.42%,黄芩苷转移率34.26%;传统煎药法制备药液中龙胆苦苷转移率89.16%,黄芩苷转移率43.55%。2种方法制备煎剂各指标比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论传统煎药法制备的清热除湿汤质量优于煎药机制备的汤剂质量。Objective To evaluate the quality of Qingre Chushi Decoction prepared by traditional decoction and machine decoction. Methods Qingre Chushi Decoction was decocted by the traditional decoction method and the automatic drug decoction machine, the differences of the deeocting rate, the transportion rate of Gentiopicrin and Baicalin in the decoction obtained by the two preparation methods were compared. Results The decoeting rate in the machine group and traditional decoction group was 9.84% and 17. 42% respectively. The transportion rate of Gentiopicrin was 67.42%, and that of Baicalin was 34. 26% in the machine group, and the transportion rate of Gentiopicrin was 89.16% and that of Baicalin was 43.55% in the traditional group. The difference of two methods was statistically significant （P 〈 0. 05 ）. Conclusion The quality of Qingre Chushi Decoction prepared by traditional decoction is better than that by machine decoction.

关 键 词：清热除湿汤 煎药机 传统煎药法 浸膏得率 龙胆苦苷 黄芩苷 质量 比较 

分 类 号：R283[医药卫生—中药学]