ISSN 0975-2366

DOI:https://doi.org/10.31838/ijpr/2020.12.03.276
Research Article

Development and Characterization of a

Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent Tablet
FASHLI RAZAK1*, NUR AISYAH MOHAMAD AZMAN1, KAI BIN LIEW1, CHIAU MING LONG2
1
Department of Pharmaceutical Technology and Industry, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Cyberjaya,
Persiaran Bestari, Cyberjaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
2
PAPRSB Institute of Health Sciences, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Brunei Darussalam.
*Corresponding Author
Email ID: fashli@cyberjaya.edu.my
Received: 24.03.20, Revised: 16.04.20, Accepted:07.05.20

ABSTRACT
Introduction
Effervescent tablet is a tablet intended to be dissolved or dispersed in water before administration. It has
become popular dosage form among patients who have difficulty in swallowing tablets and capsules.
Objective
The objective of this study was to formulate and evaluate effervescent tablet with the optimum percentages of
effervescent agents and study the effect of addition of superdisintegrant.
Methodology
This study was divided into two parts. The effect of different percentages of citric acid and sodium bicarbonate
on the effervescent tablet was studied in the first part of the study. The second part of the study was to
formulate effervescent tablet with different percentages of sodium starch glycolate which acted as
superdisintegrant. The effervescent tablets were evaluated based on their hardness, disintegration time,
percentage of weight loss, uniformity in weight and thickness.
Result and discussion
Formulation 7 which contains 40% of effervescent agent and 10% of superdisintegrant has the fastest
disintegration time (44.83 ± 6.97s) and sufficient crushing strength (4.32 ± 0.67kg). Conclusion: Formulation
7 was selected as optimum formulation in term of disintegration time due to a combination effect of
effervescent and swelling of tablet.
Keywords: Superdisintegrant, Citric Acid, Sodium Bicarbonate, Sodium Starch Glycolate, Effervescent Tablet.

INTRODUCTION sodium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate,

Drug administration via oral route is the most
convenient and commonly used drug delivery
method. Rapid dissolving tablets and effervescent
tablets are continuously gaining great success in
the pharmaceutical market. Many patients do not
take medications as prescribed due to difficulty in
swallowing tablets and hard gelatin capsules
(Widowati et al., 2013). Some of the advantages
offered by this novel dosage form includes: fast
onset of action, good stomach and intestinal
tolerance, improved palatability, accurate dosing,
improved therapeutic effect, convenient and easy
administration and ability to combine multiple
active ingredient. For effervescent tablet
formulations, due to the formation of carbon
dioxide as a result of interaction with acid and
base, the tablet is quickly broken apart in
presence of water (Stahl, 2003).
The effervescent tablets must consist of at least
two main components which are, a carbon
dioxide sources and a proton donor compound
(Lasarte-Aragonés et al., 2013). Examples of
carbon dioxide sources for effervescent tablet are
potassium carbonate and potassium bicarbonate
whereas the examples of the proton donors are
sodium hydrogen phosphate and citric acid (Jiang
et al., 2014).
This combination of acid and base will release
carbon dioxide when exposed to water.
Effervescence, which is the evolution of gas
bubbles from a liquid, occurs as the result of the
chemical reaction in contact with water. The
equation of the chemical reaction is as follows
(Thoke Sagar et al. 2013):
C6H8O7 + 3NaHCO3 Na3C6H5O7 + 4H2O
+ 3CO2
(Citric acid + Sodium Bicarbonate Sodium Citrate
+ Water + Carbon dioxide)
Disintegrants are the excipients which are to be
incorporated into tablet formulations to promote
the breakup of the tablet into smaller fragments
in an aqueous environment by increasing the
available surface area and promoting a more
rapid release of the drug substance. Besides that,
they also promote moisture penetration and
dispersion of the tablet matrix (Mohanachandran

1977| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet
et al., 2011). On the other hand,
superdisintegrants are often used in rapid
dissolving tablet formulation to achieve fast
disintegration at small amount used.
Superdisintegrants, which are usually added in an
amount of 1-10%, are the substance that cause
very rapid disintegration of the tablet by
repeatedly increasing of the tablet mass. Example
of superdisintegrants available includes
croscarmellose, crospovidone and sodium starch
glycolate where the disintegration time of the
tablet will be depending on the type and amount
of disintegrant being used (Andrzej et al.,2014).
Sodium Starch Glycolate (SSG) are reported to
result in rapid volume expansion and hydrostatic
pressures which allows faster tablet disintegration.
In addition, it is also being reported to have
porous structure that facilitates water uptake into
the tablet. This porous structure is one of the
important conditions for disintegration to occur
(Pabari & Ramtoola, 2012). The aim of this study
was to formulate a superdisintegrant enhanced
effervescent tablet by combining the strength of
effervescent tablet and rapid dissolving tablet. The
effect of different percentages of citric acid and
sodium bicarbonate on physical properties of the
effervescent tablet were study. In the later part,
Table 1: Formulation of effervescent tablet by using different percentages of effervescent agent
Effervescent Agents (mg)
Ingredients Sodium
Citric Acid
Bicarbonate
Formulation 1 (10%) 30 10
Formulation 2 (20%) 60 20
Formulation 3 (30%) 90 30
Formulation 4 (40%) 120 40
(Total weight of 1 tablet is 400 mg)
Analysis of Powder
Before the powder was compressed into tablet,
they were tested for the flowability. There were
three methods for testing of granules flow which
were angle of repose, Hausner Ratio and Carr’s
Index. These three methods were essential to
identify the flowability of the powder to aid in the
tableting process.
Angle of Repose
The angle of repose was measured by fixed
funnel method. The fixed funnel method employs
a funnel that was secured with its tip at a given
height, H, above a paper that was placed on a
flat horizontal surface. Granules were carefully
poured through the funnel until the apex of the
conical pile just touches the tip of the funnel.
Thus, with R being the radius of the base of the
1978| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
different percentages of sodium starch glycolate
was studied.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
The materials used in this study were lactose,
microcrystalline cellulose, magnesium stearate,
sodium bicarbonate, citric acid and sodium starch
glycolate. All items were purchased from R&M
Chemicals (Malaysia).
Part 1: Formulation of Effervescent Tablet Using
Different Percentages of Effervescent Agent
The effervescent agents being used in this study
were sodium bicarbonate and citric acid. The
formulations were given in Table 1. For the
primary powder mixtures, sodium bicarbonate,
citric acid, microcrystalline cellulose and lactose
were weighed and mixed for 15 minutes. After the
preparation of primary powder mixtures,
magnesium stearate which acted as lubricant was
added and mixed for 5 minutes together with
other material. Then, the powders were
compressed by direct compression using a
concave surface 10mm punch into effervescent
tablets by using a single stroke tablet press
machine (Type SSTP-12, Shakti). Each tablet has a
weight of 400mg and batch size was 100 tablets
/ batch.
Other Excipients (mg)
Magnesium
MCC Lactose
Stearate
50 302 8
50 262 8
50 222 8
50 182 8
conical pile. The angle of repose was calculated
using Equation 1 (Ileleji & Zhou, 2008).
Equation 1: Formula for angle of repose
= Angle of Repose
Bulk and Tapped Density
The bulk volume was measured after manually
tapping the cylinder two times on a flat table top
surface. The bulk density was calculated as g/ml.
The tapped volume was measured with the
density tester after tapping in increments of 500
and 750 taps with 250 drops per minute. The
tapped density was then calculated as g/ml (Shah
et al., 2008).
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet
Hausner Ratio and Compressibility Index
Hausner Ratio of the powders was determined by
comparing the tapped density to the bulk density
using the equation 2. Compressibility Index or
Carr’s Index value of the powders was calculated
according to Equation 3 (Thümmler et al., 2011).
Equation 2: Hausner Ratio formula
Equation 3: Carr's Index formula
Characterization Tests
Weight Variation
Twenty tablets were selected randomly to
investigate the weight variation. All tablets were
weighed individually and the weight for each
tablet was recorded. The average weight and
standard deviation were calculated. The limit for
weight variation in case of tablets weighting up to
120 mg is ± 10%, 120 mg up to 300 mg is ±
7.5% and more than 300 mg is ± 5%. The weight
variation was calculated using Equation 4
(Sonawane et al., 2016).
Equation 4: Percentage deviation formula
PD = Percentage Deviation
Wavg = Average weight of the tablet
W initial = individual weight of the tablet
Thickness
Ten tablets from each formulation were selected
randomly. Each tablet was being placed vertically
on the spindle of hardness tester machine (Model
EBT-2PL, Electrolab). The thickness reading is
shown on the screen of the machine and the
thickness for each tablet was then recorded.
Hardness
Ten tablets were randomly selected from each
batch of formulation. A tablet was placed
between the spindle of the hardness tester
machine (Model EBT-2PL, Electrolab) and
pressure was applied toward the tablet. The
pressure was then increased as uniformly as
possible until the tablet breaks and the pressure
required to break the tablet was then read off the
machine and recorded. (Shah et al., 2008).
Friability
For each batch of formulations, 20 tablets were
randomly selected, and the friability of the tablets
were determined using a friability tester machine
(Model FRV 200U, Copley). The 20 tablets from
each formulation were first weighed and tested at
a speed of 25 rpm for 4 minutes. The dusts and
1979| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
cracked effervescent tablets produced after the
friability testing need to be removed and
separated from the others. After removing the
dusts, the tablets were being re-weighed and the
friability percentage was calculated using the
following equation 5 (Emami et al., 2008).
Equation 5: Percentage of weight loss formula
%F = Percentage of Weight Loss
w1= weight at time zero
w2= weight after test
Disintegration Test
The test was carried out on 6 tablets that were
randomly selected, using the disintegration tester
(Model ED2AL, Electrolab). Distilled water at 37°C
± 2°C was used as the disintegration media and
the time in second was taken for the tablet to
undergo complete disintegration (Gupta et al.,
2012).
Selection of Optimum Formulation
One best formulation from stage one of the
studies would be chosen to proceed with the
second stage which was to be incorporated with
different percentages of superdisintegrant. The
best formulation was being selected based on the
effervescent tablet’s ability to undergo the fastest
disintegration, having optimum hardness and
friability and having a uniform weight and
thickness.
Part 2: Formulation of Effervescent Tablet with
Different Percentage of Superdisintegrant Using
Optimized Percentage of Effervescent Agents
The second stage of this study was done by
incorporating different percentages of
superdisintegrant for each different formulation.
The superdisintegrant that being used in this study
was sodium starch glycolate (SSG). Three new
formulations were created and named as
Formulation 5, 6 and 7 with 2%, 5% and 10%
sodium starch glycolate respectively.
Method of Preparation
The effervescent tablet in this stage of study was
carried out using direct compression method. For
the primary powder mixtures, sodium
bicarbonate, citric acid, lactose and
microcrystalline cellulose were weighed and
mixed manually for 15 minutes. After that,
magnesium stearate which acts as lubricant were
weighed and added into the primary powder
mixtures. The secondary powder mixture was
mixed altogether for 5 minutes. Then, the
secondary powder mixtures were added with
sodium starch glycolate and was then mixed
again for 5 minutes. Lastly, the effervescent
powders were compressed into tablets by using
single stroke tablet press (Type SSTP-12, Shakti)
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet

with a 10mm concave surface punch. The
analysis of granules and physical characterization
tests of effervescent powder which contain
different percentages of superdisintegrant were
being carried out similarly as the first part of this
study.
RESULTS
Part 1: Evaluation of Effervescent Tablet with
Different Percentages of Effervescent Agents
The results of angle of repose, Hausner ratio and
Carr’s index of blank effervescent powder formed
with different percentages of effervescent agents
was tabulated in Table 2. Formulation 4 which
contain 40% of effervescent agents showed the
smallest angle of repose which was 31.32º while
Formulation 2 which contain 20% of effervescent
agents showed the largest angle of repose which
Table 2: Comparison of angle of repose, Hausner ratio and Carr’s Index of blank effervescent
powder formed with different percentages of effervescent agents.
was 34.71º. Meanwhile, the closer the reading of
Hausner ratio to 1.0, the better the powder
flowability. Based on the table stated, Formulation
4 showed the lowest Hausner ratio reading which
was 1.15 while both Formulation 2 and
Formulation 3 showed the highest Hausner ratio
reading which was 1.18.
For Carr’s Index, the closer the reading to 10 or
below than 10, the better the powder flowability.
Based on Table 2 which compares the Carr’s
Index of blank effervescent powder formed with
different percentages of effervescent agents,
Formulation 4 showed the lowest Carr’s Index
reading which was 13.32 while Formulation 3
showed the highest Carr’s Index reading which
was 15.24.

Formulation Percentage of Angle of Repose (º) Hausner Carr’s

Effervescent Agent (%) Ratio Index
1 10 31.52 1.16 13.97
2 20 34.71 1.18 14.89
3 30 33.79 1.18 15.24
4 40 31.32 1.15 13.32

Physical Characterization of Blank Effervescent Based on the result obtained, Formulation 4

Tablet
The formulated blank effervescent tablet which
contain different percentages of effervescent
agents can be evaluated by various methods
which includes hardness test, weight variation test,
thickness, friability test and disintegration test. The
formulation that gives the best result would then
be chosen to proceed to stage 2 of this study. The
result for all these tests was tabulated in Table 3.
which contain 40% of effervescent agents showed
the fastest disintegration time, 49.17 seconds, the
highest hardness value, 4.49 kg, the lowest
percentage loss in weight after the friability test,
0.62%. Besides that, effervescent tablets from
Formulation 4 also were uniform in terms of
weight and thickness.

Table 3: Comparison on the different test results for blank effervescent tablet with different
percentages of effervescent agents.
Formulation Percentage of Hardness Weight uniformity Thickness Friability Dinstegration
effervescent Mean (kg) ± Mean (kg) ± SD Mean (mm) ± (%) time Mean (s)
agents (%) SD SD ± SD
1 10 1.49±0.29 403.00±7.45 5.40± 0.03 8.43 70.67± 18.59
2 20 2.34± 0.41 398.50±10.40 5.36± 0.02 7.03 60.00 ± 6.45
3 30 3.17± 0.72 398.40±6.88 5.39± 0.05 3.90 53.33 ± 3.62
4 40 4.49± 0.72 400.90±9.95 5.35± 0.10 0.62 49.17 ± 7.44

Formulation 4 was chosen to proceed to the next
stage of study to test with different percentages of
superdisintegrant (sodium starch glycolate). Table
4 provides the different percentages of
superdisintegrant agents used in the formulation
of effervescent tablet. These formulations were
named as Formulation 5, Formulation 6 and
Formulation 7 which contained 2%, 5% and 10%
of superdisintegrant respectively.

1980| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet

Table 4: Formulation of effervescent tablet by using different percentages of superdisintegrant

agents.
Ingredients Effervescent Agents (mg) Other excipients (mg) Super-disintegrant (mg)
S.B C.A MCC La Mg. Stearate SSG
Formulation
120 40 50 174 8 8
5
Formulation
120 40 50 162 8 20
6
Formulation
120 40 50 142 8 40
7
Total weight of each tablet is equal to 400 mg.
SB: Sodium bicarbonate; CA: Citric acid, MCC: Microcystalline cellulose; La: Lactose; SSG: Sodium
starchglycolate.
Part 2: Evaluation of Blank Effervescent Tablet repose which was 37.70º. Based on the table 6,
with Different Percentages of Superdisintegrant Formulation 5 showed the lowest Hausner ratio
Formulation 5 showed the degrees of angle of reading which was 1.19 while Formulation 7
repose of blank effervescent powder formed with showed the highest Hausner ratio reading which
different percentages of superdisintegrant. The was 1.25. The closer the reading of Carr’s Index
smaller the angle of repose made by the powder, to 10 or below than 10, the better the powder
the better the powder flow properties. Based on flowability. Based on the table stated, Formulation
the table stated, Formulation 5 showed the 5 showed the lowest Carr’s Index reading which
smallest angle of repose which was 36.71º while was 16.32 while Formulation 7 showed the
Formulation 7 showed the highest angle of highest Carr’s Index reading which was 20.73.

Table 5: Comparison on the different test results for blank effervescent tablet with different
percentages of effervescent agents.

Formulation Percent of super a* b* c* d* e*

disintegrant (%) f* g* h*
5 2 36.71 1.19 16.32 5.03 395.00 4.83 0.38 57.33
± ± 6.07 ± ± 3.72
0.57 0.03
6 5 36.94 1.24 19.97 4.88 396.50 4.86 0.38 49.50
± ± 7.45 ± ± 5.82
0.63 0.02
7 10 37.70 1.25 20.73 4.32 396.00 4.88 0.38 44.83
± ± 6.81 ± ± 6.97
0.67 0.09
a*: Angle of repose (º) e*: Weight uniformity mean (mg) ± SD
b*: Hausner ratio f*: Thickness
c*: Carr’s index g*: Percentage of weight loss (%)
d*: Hardness mean (kg) ± SD h*: Disintegration time mean (s) ± SD

Among all the formulation of blank effervescent
tablet with different percentages of
superdisintegrant that was significantly different,
Formulation 5 has the highest hardness (5.03 ±
0.57 kg) while formulation 7 has the lowest
hardness (4.32 ± 0.67 kg). Besides that, there
were no mean differences for the uniformity of
weight of blank effervescent tablet containing
different percentages of superdisintegrant. In
addition, there were none of the tablets from all
formulations that deviated by ± 5% and ± 10%
from the mean value. So, all the tablets were
considered having a uniform weight as the weight
were not deviated much from each other.
For the thickness test, there were no mean
differences for the thickness of blank effervescent
tablet containing different percentages of
superdisintegrant. Formulation 7 showed the
highest thickness which was 4.877 mm ± 0.085
while Formulation 5 showed the lowest thickness
reading which was 4.833 mm ± 0.031. Other
than that, the acceptable range for friability
testing was between 0 to 1%. Based on the Table
5, all formulations considered acceptable
because the percentage of weight loss was less

1981| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet
than 1%. All three formulations had the same
percentage of weight loss which was 0.38%.
Formulation 7 showed the fastest disintegration
time which was 44.83 ± 6.97s.
Selection of Effervescent Tablet Formulation
Containing Optimum Percentages of
Superdisintegrant
Formulation 7 which contained 10% of sodium
starch glycolate and 40% of effervescent agents
(sodium bicarbonate and citric acid) showed the
fastest disintegration time which was 44.83
seconds. The percentage of weight loss after
friability testing was 0.38% and having
mechanical strength of 4.32 kg which was still
within the acceptable range as it did not exceed
1% of the actual weight (Lachmann et al., 1986).
Besides that, all the effervescent tablets from
Formulation 7 also had a uniformity in weight
and thickness. Therefore, formulation 7 was
chosen as the optimum formulation.
DISCUSSION
Part 1: Characterization of Effervescent
Powders Containing Different Percentages of
Effervescent Agents
The angle of repose ranging from 31º to 35º
indicates that the powder had a good flow
property. Since the angle of repose of all
formulations for the blank effervescent tablet
containing different percentages of effervescent
agents were within the range stated above, they
were considered to have a good powder flow
property.
One of the factors that might contribute for the
good flowability was the percentage of
magnesium stearate which acts as lubricant being
used in all formulations were enough to give
better flowability of the powder. Based on the
study done by Morin & Briens (2013), magnesium
stearate could improve powder flowability when
the amount of lubricant is 1-2% of the total
powder weight, but then further increase of
lubricant up to 5% will have no significant impact
on the powder flow. In this part of study, the
amount of magnesium stearate used was 2%.
Thus, this contribute to a good angle of repose
observed in the formulation.
When comparing both Hausner Ratio and Carr’s
Index of blank effervescent powders containing
different percentages of effervescent agents, all
four formulations showed a good flow property.
This result correlated with the angle of repose
formed by all formulations.
From all four formulations, the hardness trend
from Formulation 1 until Formulation 4 was
increasing from 10% - 40% effervescent agents.
Formulation 4 was considered acceptable
whereas the other three formulations were
1982| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
considered as unacceptable because the
hardness value was lower than the specified
minimum acceptable hardness for uncoated
effervescent tablet which was 4.08 kg as stated by
Aslani & Fattahi, (2013).
Based on Mohammad Saleem et al., (2014), for
conventional tablets and effervescent tablet, the
result was considered acceptable when the 20
tablet that were being tested only lose less than
1% from its original weight. Formulation 4 which
contained 40% of effervescent agents showed
acceptable result which was 0.62% of weight loss.
The result for friability test correlated with the
hardness test which was the higher the force
needed to break the effervescent tablet, the lower
the percentage of weight loss. Thus, this means
that only effervescent tablets in Formulation 4
could withstand the mechanical stress not only
during the manufacturing process, but also
during distribution and handling by customers.
For the effervescent tablets which the friability
value larger than 1%, the tablets might cause
tablets defects and might also causes loss in the
effervescent tablet content.
In this study, the formulated weight for the blank
effervescent tablet formulation containing
different percentages of effervescent agents was
400 mg each. Based on Sonawane et al., (2016),
for tablets weighed greater than 300 mg each,
the upper and lower limit should be ± 5%.
Besides that, only two tablets from each
formulation were allowed to be over or lower
than the limit stated and none of the tablets
should deviate by ± 10% from the mean. Since
the upper and lower limit were calculated based
on the mean, different formulation will have
different values of upper and lower limits.
None of the tablets for all the blank effervescent
tablet containing different percentages of
effervescent agent weighed over or lower than 5%
from the mean. This means that the weight did
not being affected much by the difference in the
percentage of effervescent agent used in this
formulation. Besides that, it can be assured that
there was uniformity during the die-filling process
thus producing a consistent weight for all the
effervescent tablets.
Aslani & Eatesam, (2013) stated that the
acceptable range for the disintegration time of
effervescence tablet, which was the time that the
solution becomes free of particles and clear, was
under 3 minutes. In this part of study, all the
effervescent tablets had met the requirement
stated as they manage to fully disintegrate within
3 minutes. From the result of disintegration time,
it can be concluded that the higher the
percentage of effervescent agents used in the
formulation, the faster the time for the
effervescent tablet to disintegrate. When the
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet
effervescent part takes up a major portion of the
formulation, it helps to break the tablet apart
faster when the effervescent reacted.
All the blank effervescent tablets being produced
had passed the thickness test where none of the
tablets’ thickness were thicker or thinner than 5%
from the thickness mean. This result depicts that
the machine used to compress the effervescent
tablet was capable in producing consistent and
uniform dimension of tablets.
Selection of Effervescent Tablet Formulation
Which Contain Optimum Percentages of
Effervescent Agents
Based on the results obtained for all the tests
done, Formulation 4 which contains 40%
effervescent agents was chosen to proceed with
the next part of the study which was to be
incorporated with different percentages of sodium
starch glycolate. Formulation 4 provided the
fastest disintegration time compared to other
formulations which was 49.17 ± 7.44 seconds.
Besides that, Formulation 4 also produced the
highest hardness which was 4.49 ± 0.72 kg and
the lowest percentage of weight loss after friability
testing which was 0.62%. These two factors had
the important effect on the effervescent tablet
produced because it will show the ability of the
effervescent tablet to withstand the mechanical
shock during manufacturing process, distribution
and lastly during the handling by the customers.
For weight variation and thickness test, all the
weight and thickness of each effervescent tablets
tested were within the acceptable range. The
uniformity of both weight and thickness of the
effervescent tablets were the important
parameters to evaluate the consistency in the die
fill and pressure applied during tablet
compression.
Part 2: Characterization of Effervescent
Powders Containing Different Percentages of
Superdisintegrant
The angle of repose ranging from 36º to 40º
indicates that the powder had a fair flow property
and aid was not needed. The angle of repose for
all three formulations were within the range of
36° to 40°. Thus, this showed that all the
formulations for the blank effervescent tablet
containing different percentages of
superdisintegrant were considered to have a fair
powder flow property. Formulation 7 had the
biggest angle of repose followed by Formulation
6 and lastly Formulation 5 which had the smallest
angle of repose.
When compared the angle of repose of the blank
effervescent powder from Stage 1 and Stage 2 of
this study, blank effervescent powder in Stage 1
gave smaller angle of repose than blank
1983| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
effervescent powder in Stage 2. This might be
affected by the addition of sodium starch
glycolate which was well known material that
could absorb moisture from the environment
rapidly. As studied by Faqih et al., (2007), the
amount of moisture often had important effects
on the physical and chemical properties of
pharmaceutical solids. As the moisture content
increases in the powder bed, the flowability
becomes poorer as the moisture condenses on
the surface and increases cohesion.
The results showed decreasing trend of the
effervescent tablet hardness value when the
percentage of superdisintegrant was increased
from 2% to 10%. From the results obtained, it
could be concluded that the higher the
percentage of superdisintegrant used in
effervescent tablet formulation, the lower the
hardness of the tablet. A study by Taymouri et al.,
(2019) also reported a similar trend when
increasing the citric acid, it reduces the hardness
of effervescent tablet containing bismuth sub
citrate.
The friability result was considered ideal when the
tablets only lost less than 1% from their original
weight. In this part of study, the effervescent
tablets containing different percentages of
superdisintegrant from all formulations had
percentage of weight loss less than 1%. The
correlation of hardness and friability could be
seen in this study where the ideal friability could
only be obtained when the hardness result was
greater than 4.08 kg as stated by Aslani &
Fattahi, (2013).
Based on the experiment of uniformity in weight
of effervescent tablet produced, the results show
that all the effervescent tablets containing
different percentages of superdisintegrant passed
the weight variation test. This was because, none
of the effervescent tablets deviated more or less
than 5% from the mean weight for each
formulation. One of factor that could determine
the weight uniformity was the consistency in the
die filling, appropriate die movement and also
consistency in the applied compression force
during the tableting process.
Formulation 7 which contain 10% of sodium
starch glycolate had the least disintegration time
which was 44.83 seconds while Formulation 5
which contain 2% of sodium starch glycolate had
the longest disintegration time which was 57.33
seconds. It can be concluded that the higher the
percentage of sodium starch glycolate used, the
shorter the time taken needed by effervescent
tablets to disintegrate. This result coincides with
result in the study done by Shakar et al., (2012)
reported that high concentration of
superdisintegrant would decrease the
disintegration time.
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet
Sodium starch glycolate was commonly known on
its ability to absorb moisture rapidly. When it
interacts with water, it will undergo swelling
mechanism where the adhesiveness of other
ingredients in a tablet was overcome which then
causes the effervescent tablet to fall apart (Rawat
et al., 2014). So, in this part of study, the higher
the percentage of sodium starch glycolate being
used, the vigorous the swelling mechanism, thus
reducing the disintegration time. The
disintegration mechanism of formulation 7 is
suggested as a synergistic effect between swelling
of superdisintegrant and formation of carbon
dioxide from the effervescent reaction that break
the tablets apart.
In order to pass the thickness test, the thickness
for each tablet in each formulation must only
deviated within ± 5% from the mean thickness.
Any tablet which the thickness reading deviate
more or less than 5% would be rejected. The
thickness of the effervescent tablet would closely
relate to the content uniformity of materials used
in each formulation. The percentage of deviation
of the tablet thickness above or lower than 5%
could causes inconsistency in the content of
materials in each effervescent tablet. In this part
of study, since all the effervescent tablet produced
had passed the thickness test, it can be assured
that each of effervescent tablets had a uniform
materials content.
CONCLUSION
The study has investigated the effect of
effervescent agents and superdisintegrant on the
effervescent tablet formed. Formulation 7 which
contained 40% of effervescent agent and 10% of
superdisintegrant was chosen as the optimum
formulation referring to the disintegration time,
percentage of weight loss and the crushing
strength of the effervescent tablet. The
manufacturing method used in this study was by
direct compression method. This method was well
known to be a simple method and materials used
were affordable.
REFERENCES
1. Andrzej P, Karol I, Magdalena N and Ewa P, The
Excipients Used in The Non-Coated Tablets,
Doktorsavhandlingar Vid Chalmers Tekniska
Hogskola, 2014; 26(2264).
2. Aslani A and Eatesam P, Design, formulation and
physicochemical evaluation of acetaminophen
effervescent tablets, Journal of Reports in
Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2013; 2(2): 140–149.
3. Aslani A and Fattahi F, Formulation,
characterization and physicochemical evaluation
of potassium citrate effervescent tablets,
Advanced Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 2013; 3(1):
217–225.
1984| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
4. Emami J, Tajeddin M and Ahmadi F, Preparation
and in vitro evaluation of sustained-release
matrix tablets of flutamide using synthetic and
naturally occurring polymers, Iranian Journal of
Pharmaceutical Research, 2008; 7(4): 247–257.
5. Faqih AMN, Mehrotra A, Hammond SV and
Muzzio FJ, Effect of moisture and magnesium
stearate concentration on flow properties of
cohesive granular materials, International Journal
of Pharmaceutics, 2007; 336(2): 338–345.
6. Gupta AK, Mittal A and Jha KK, Fast Dissolving
Tablet- A Review. The Pharma In Morin, G., &
Briens, L. (2013). The Effect of Lubricants on
Powder Flowability for Pharmaceutical
Application, AAPS Pharm Sci Tech, 2012; 14(3):
1158–1168.
7. Ileleji KE and Zhou B, The angle of repose of
bulk corn stover particles, Powder Technology,
2008; 187(2): 110–118.
8. Jiang W, Chen X, Liu F, You X and Xue J,
Effervescence-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid
microextraction using a solid effervescent agent
as a novel dispersion technique for the analysis
of fungicides in apple juice, Journal of Separation
Science, 2014; 37(21): 3157–3163.
9. Lachman L, Liberman HA and Kanig JL, The
theory and practice of industrial pharmacy. 3rd
ed. Philadelphia: lea and febiger, 1986.
10. Lasarte-Aragonés G, Lucena R, Cárdenas S and
Valcárcel M, Effervescence-assisted carbon
nanotubes dispersion for the micro-solid-phase
extraction of triazine herbicides from
environmental waters, Analytical and
Bioanalytical Chemistry, 2013; 405(10): 3269–
3277.
11. Mohanachandran PS, Sindhumol PG and Kiran
TS, Superdisintegrants: An overview,
International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Review and Research, 2011; 6(1): 105–109.
12. Pabari RM and Ramtoola Z, Effect of a
Disintegration Mechanism on Wetting, Water
Absorption, and Disintegration Time of
Orodispersible Tablets, Journal of Young
Pharmacists, 2012; 4(3): 157–163.
13. Rawat S, Derle DV, Fukte SR, Shinde PR and
Parve BS, Superdisintegrants: an overview,
World journal of pharmacy and pharmaceutical
sciences, 2014; 3(5): 263-278.
14. Saleem M, Shahin M, Srinivas B and Begum A,
Evaluation of tablets by friability apparatus,
International Journal Research Pharmaceutical
Chemistry, 2014; 4(4): 837-840.
15. Shah RB, Tawakkul MA and Khan MA,
Comparative Evaluation of Flow for
Pharmaceutical Powders and Granules, AAPS
PharmSciTech, 2008; 9(1): 250–258.
16. Shakar AAM, Ibn Razzak M, Shaikhul M, Hossain
MM, Arif MH and Reza MS, Effect of
Superdisintegrants on Some Physical Attributes
and Release Profile of Paracetamol Immediate
 Fashli Razak et al / Development and Characterization of a Superdisintegrant Enhanced Effervescent
Tablet

Release Tablets, Bangladesh Pharmaceutical

Journal, 2012; 15(1): 89–94.
17. Sonawane LV, Poul BN and Tippanbone PM,
Formulation and evaluation of fast dissolving
tablets of amlodipine besylate by using
sublimation method, Latin American Journal of
Pharmacy, 2016; 35(3): 481–488.
18. Stahl H, Effervescent dosage manufacturing,
Pharmaceutical Technology Europe, 2003; 15:
25-28
19. Taymouri S, Mostafavi A, Javanmardi M,
Formulation and optimization of effervescent
tablet containing bismuth sub-citrate, Journal of
Reports in Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2019; 8(2):
236.
20. Thoke SB, Sharma YP, Rawat SS and Nangude SL,
Formulation development & evaluation of
effervescent tablet of Alendronate sodium with
vitamin D3, Journal of Drug Delivery and
Therapeutics, 2013; 3(5): 65-74.
21. Thümmler K, Fischer S, Feldner A, Weber V,
Ettenauer M, Loth F and Falkenhagen D,
Preparation and characterization of cellulose
microspheres, Cellulose, 2011; 18(1): 135–142.
22. Widowati W, Rusmana D, Herdiman H, Tiono
H, Wargasetia TL, Suttirak W and Kaneko F,
Extract for Effervescent Tablet, World Academy
of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2013;
51: 190–195.

1985| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Jul- Sep 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3