Errors in Pharmaceutical Analysis

 INTRODUCTION 

The skill, knowledge, expertise and above all the degree of confidence involved in the ultimate result of an analyst is solely governed by the extent of accuracy and precision achieved by the analytical procedure vis-a-vis the possible sources of error that may be incorporated inadvertently. In fact, the quantitative pharmaceutical analysis is not merely confined to just taking a random sample, performing a single assay quickly, and finally making a loud claim that the result so obtained cannot be challenged. Truly speaking an ideal analyst must have a total in-depth knowledge of the chemistry involved along with the pros and cons of interferences that may be caused due to the host of compounds, elements and ions besides adequate exposure and hands-on experience of the statistical distribution of values.

 

The terminology ‘error’ invariably refers to the difference in the numerical values between a measured value and the true value. It has become universally accepted in methods of comparison that the percentage composition of a ‘standard sample’ provided and certified by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or the British Pharmacopoea Chemical Reference Substance (BPCRS) or the European Pharmacopoea Chemical Reference Substance (EPCRS) must be regarded and treated as absolutely correct, pure and authentic while evaluating a new analytical method. Consequently, the differences thus obtained between the standard values and those by the new analytical methods are then treated as ‘errors’ in the latest procedure.