Investigation on packaging material of counterfeit Panadol variants and Creobic cream by non-destructive tests
The World Health Organization (WHO) has defined counterfeit drugs as those which are “deliberately mislabelled with respect to identity and/or source”. Packaging materials are ubiquitous and manufacturers are able to obtain them from multiples of supplier. That is the reason for the unfeasible confi...
Saved in:
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | Thesis |
| 語言: | English |
| 出版: |
2014
|
| 主題: | |
| 在線閱讀: | http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/48496/1/TuhfahZahidahShamsuddinMFS2014.pdf |
| 標簽: |
添加標簽
沒有標簽, 成為第一個標記此記錄!
|
| 總結: | The World Health Organization (WHO) has defined counterfeit drugs as those which are “deliberately mislabelled with respect to identity and/or source”. Packaging materials are ubiquitous and manufacturers are able to obtain them from multiples of supplier. That is the reason for the unfeasible confiscation. There are a few methods used to detect counterfeit products through its packaging: visual inspection (visible light) and other optical methods such as infrared and ultraviolet analysis as well as pattern recognition. The objective of this study is to differentiate the features on the packaging material found from the original and the counterfeit of the same fast-moving pharmaceutical products. There are four different product packaging investigated obtained through over-the-counter purchase, from the complainant or seized by the authority. Firstly, examination is carried out on the direct paperboard packaging by comparison; physical examination on the basic properties (viz. dimension, thickness and prints), microscopic, optical character recognition (OCR) and near infrared analysis. Then, further investigation on the information printed and hologram serial number was done. Determination of the originality of the products upon procurement was done through authenticating the hologram. Microscopic examination on the printed paperboard exhibited consistent printing effect for all of the counterfeit and the genuine ones. Results on OCR for certain parts of the prints show constant difference between the original and counterfeit. However, the IR results indicated that such differences may prove inconsistent and hence unreliable to be used for comparison. In conclusion, the counterfeit pharmaceutical packaging may be distinguished from the genuine ones through physical examination of its basic properties, microscopic observation and OCR. |
|---|