{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016975308641975308, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0038580246913580245, 'mean_word_length': 5.1469194312796205, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of two methods for obtaining size distribution characteristics of particulate matter in large-volume parenterals.

The size distributions of the particulate matter present in six types of large-volume parenteral solutions, as determined by an automatic particle counter and a microscopic counting technique, were compared by plotting log N greater than D versus log D. The resulting data were analyzed individually and also as averages. The data showed a linear relationship between log N greater than D and log D over the 1-100-micron particle-size range, indicating that both methods determine a similar particle-size distribution. The data also indicated that the particle-size distributions were largely independent of the type of solution and obeyed a power law of the form N greater than D = N greater than 1DK. These observations suggest that the major source of contamination is air-borne dust particles, which fall into a solution randomly, and that it may be possible to monitor the smaller, more abundant particles with the automatic particle counter to obtain a rapid estimate of parenteral cleanliness. The automatic particle counter thus appears to be a viable alternative to the microscopic counting technique for assessing the particulate matter content of parenterals.