• 中国核心期刊(遴选)数据库收录期刊
  • 中文科技期刊数据库收录期刊
  • 中国期刊全文数据库收录期刊
  • 中国学术期刊综合评价数据库统计源期刊等

快速检索引用检索图表检索高级检索

中国医药导刊 ›› 2020, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (7): 487-491.

• 管理与实践 • 上一篇    下一篇

防感方饮片吸水系数提升煎煮自动化加水量的应用

欧阳百发, 施宏彬*   

  1. 康美药业股份有限公司, 广东 广州 511495
  • 收稿日期:2020-03-17 修回日期:2020-04-30 出版日期:2020-07-28 发布日期:2020-09-28
  • 基金资助:

    专利证书(专利号:ZL201610525316.1;专利名称:自动加水系统及控制方法);

    专利证书(专利号:CN201810239781.8;专利名称:一种中药饮片煎煮自动加水方法);

    专利证书(专利号: CN201810240315.1;专利名称:一种中药饮片煎煮加水量计算方法、存储介质及智能终端)

Application of Automatic Decocting of Fanggan Prescription on Water Absorption Coefficient of the Herbal Pieces

  OU YANG Baifa, SHI Hongbin*   

  1. Kangmei Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Guangdong Guangzhou 511495, China
  • Received:2020-03-17 Revised:2020-04-30 Online:2020-07-28 Published:2020-09-28

摘要: 目的:通过智慧中药房平台系统收集广东省各医疗机构防感处方,测定防感方中各饮片吸水系数,提升防感方自动化现代煎煮效率。方法:通过对各防感方中单味中药饮片在煎煮过程中的吸水量研究,称重并计算中药饮片的浸泡、煎煮、挤压吸水系数。比较单味饮片吸水系数与人工经验、1.5均值吸水系数煎煮后的预计取液量的差异,以确定最适合加水方法。结果:运用单味饮片吸水系数计算所得实际取液量误差范围较小。传统煎煮方面,人工加水取液量误差在17.33%~29.33%,平均22.36%,而自动化单味药材饮片吸水系数的运用取液量误差在0.67%~4.00%,平均2.37%;现代煎煮方面,1.5均值取液量误差在1.21%~6.75%,平均4.29%,而自动化单味饮片吸水系数的运用取液量误差在0.63%~1.88%,平均1.16%。通过防感处方反推计算,1.5均值加水量误差在0.12%~8.16%,平均5.15%,而自动化单味饮片吸水系数的运用加水量误差在0.02%~2.86%,平均1.09%。结论:防感方单味饮片吸水系数运用于计算加水量优于人工加水及1.5均值加水,可用于指导防感方的自动化加水,提升煎煮效率。

关键词: font-size:medium, ">防感方;单味饮片煎煮吸水系数;单味饮片挤压吸水系数;加水量;取液量

Abstract: Objective: Through the intelligent TCM pharmacy platform system, to determine the water absorption coefficient of each herbal in fanggan prescription and improve the modern automatic decocting efficiency. Methods: To study on the water absorption of each herbal in fanggan prescription, by weighing and calculateing the water absorption coefficient of immersion, decoction and extrusion of each herbal. Compared the liquid volume difference of water absorption coefficient of each herbal, 1.5 mean water absorption coefficient and artificial experience operation after decocting, so that determine the suitable method for water addition. Results: The error range of actual volume of liquid obtained from water absorption coefficient of each herbal was small. In traditional decocting, the error range of the artificial water addition for the liquid obtained is 17.33%-29.33%, with an average of 22.36%, but the error range of liquid volume obtained from automatic decoction water absorption coefficient of each herbal is 0.67%-4.00%, with an average of 2.37%. In modern decocting, the error range of liquid volume obtained from 1.5 mean value is 1.21%-6.75%, with an average of 4.29%, but the error range of liquid volume obtained from automatic decoction water absorption coefficient of each herbal is 0.63%-1.88%,with an average of 1.16%. Through the reserve calculation, the error range of water addition of 1.5 mean value is 0.12%-8.16%, with an average of 5.15%, but the error range of water addition of automatic decoction water absorption coefficient of each herbal is 0.02%-2.86%,with an average of 1.09%. Conclusion: The water absorption coefficient of fanggan decoction applied in calculating water addition is better than artificial water addition and 1.5 mean value water addition, and can be used to guide the automatic water addition of fanggan decoction and improve the decoction efficiency.
 

Key words: font-size:medium, ">Fanggan prescription; Water absorption coefficient of single herbal pieces decoction; Water absorption coefficient of single herbal pieces extrusion; Amount of water added; Amount of liquid taken

中图分类号: