Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundPharmacological properties of Quercus infectoria Olivier (galls) have been determined to be astringent, antidiabetic, antipyretic, anti-tremor, local anesthetic, and anti-parkinsonism. The galls of Quercus infectoria have been used for millennia in traditional oriental medicine in Asian nations to treat inflammatory illnesses.AimsThe study's objective was to create a Quercus infectoria Olivier gall extract in stable water in oil (w/o) emulsion and to check its effects on the mechanical properties of skin and antiaging effects.MethodThe galls were macerated in absolute methanol. Quercus infectoria Olivier gall extract's antioxidant property was evaluated using the 2, 2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) technique. Stearic acid, cetyl alcohol, KOH, glycerin, and distilled water were used to create the emulsion. The test (with extract) and control (without extract) emulsions were made, respectively, using the same process. Stability tests (color, liquefaction, microscopy, phase separation, and pH) are performed in in vitro, lasted 72 days at four distinct storage temperatures that is 8°C, 25°C, 40°C, and 40°C + 75% RH for both the control and test formulations. By using spectrophotometry, the (SPF) sun protection factors of the two formulations were calculated at various concentrations. Extract from Quercus infectoria underwent phytochemical investigation as well.ResultsThe results showed that Quercus infectoria Olivier has antioxidant and (SPF) sun protection properties, reduce sebum, increases elasticity and stable emulsion containing 04% Quercus infectoria gall extract which might be used as topical antiaging formulation.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.