formulation of table 4a was prepared and incorporated into a permeation testing apparatus according to the same procedure as in example 3 using duro tak 87 6430 as the adhesive solution the formulation of example 4 was tested using a permeation cell with a definable surface area for permeation the receptor of the permeation cell was ethanol water 40 60 three permeation tests 4 1 4 2 4 3 were conducted giving the results listed in table 4b below table 4b drug loss due amount sam recep sam to cumulative per pling drug tor drug pling sam cumulative amount meated test time conc volume amount volume pling drug loss permeated per cm 2 hours u03bcg ml ml u03bcg ml u03bcg u03bcg u03bcg u03bcg cm 2 4 1 4 0 750 13 9 750 1 0 750 0 000 9 750 5 518 24 8 590 13 111 670 1 8 590 0 750 112 420 63 622 28 9 430 13 122 590 1 9 430 9 340 131 930 74 663 48 13 706 13 178 178 1 13 706 18 770 196 945 111 459 52 12 916 13 167 908 1 12 916 32 476 200 384 113 404 72 15 903 13 206 739 1 15 903 45 392 252 131 142 689 76 15 470 13 201 110 1 15 470 61 295 262 405 148 503 96 16 762 13 217 906 1 16 762 76 765 294 671 166 763 4 2 4 0 468 13 6 084 1 0 468 0 000 6 084 3 443 24 8 485 13 110 305 1 8 485 0 468 110 773 62 690.