Phatak repertory

A CONCISE REPERTORY OF
HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICINES

K.K.RATHIBHA
3RD MD CR

homeobook.com
DR.S R PHATAK
 Its place….
• one of the most reliable alphabetical
repertory
• Aimed at reducing the burden of
prescriber, in every sense of the word
 Other alphabetical repertories

• Glazor-First alphabetical pocket

repertory-Leipzig-1833
• Clofar Muller- Systematic alphabetical
repertory-1848
• Bryant-An alphabetical repertory-New
York-1851
• Homoeopathic medical repertory- Dr.
Robin Murphy-1993 (Chapters in
alphabetical order)
• Dr. S.R. Phatak was basically an allopathic
doctor with M.B.B.S.
• He had sound knowledge in organon,
Materia Medica and various repertories
 OTHER WORKS

1. Repertory of Biochemic remedies

2. Homoeopathic Materia medica and
Repertory of Homoeopathic
medicines( in Marathi)
3. Materia medica of Homeopathic
medicines
 beginning…….
• got the idea of alphabetical repertory while
teaching his fellow doctors.
• felt that repertory should be concise , handy
and useful for ready reference.
• It should reduce the difficulty of the physician
in searching a rubric.
• included rubrics duly verified by him.
• does not take the place of exhaustive
repertory like Kent’s or Boenninghausen’s
repertory.
• Name of book - A CONCISE REPERTORY
OF HOMOEOPATIC MEDICINES –
alphabetically arranged .
• Latest edition – 4th- revised and corrected
by Dr. C . Jeevanandam
• Published by- B JAIN P PUBLISHERS
• USA-EUROPE-INDIA
• Dedicated to his friend SL . Kapadi
 Relied on….
• Dr. Kent
• Dr. Boger
• Dr.Clarke
• Remedies are reduced to minimum possible .
• No drug is given unless the author has used
it in his own practice or unless there is
strong justification provided for it, by
authorities like
• Dr. Boger
• Dr. Kent
• Dr. Clarke
• Every remedy high grade or low grade is
equally important when it is connected
with concomitant or with an unusual
modalities …
 Story

• Dr.phatak had idea of preparing a repertory

• fragile health prevented him.
• Mr.S.L. Kapadi, took rough draft and notes of
his Marathy repertory and formed skeletal
copy.
• author arranged the work properly and made
many additions.
• Dr. Homai Merchant typed this hand written
copy.
• This copy was lying on authors table for nearly
10 years.
 First edition- 1963
• Mr. Kapadi author’s son Dr.D.S. Phatak
• They went through all the sections did
the preliminary works and with the help
of Mr. Datay first edition was printed in
September 1963 at Mouj Printing press.
 PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION

• Aim of this book as a handy and useful

reference book
• It is an attempt to lessen difficulties of the
prescriber
• Remedies for particular rubrics are reduced
to minimum
• No medicine given unless the author has used
it in his own clinical practice or from
genuine authorities like Boger , Kent, Clark
etc
 After first edition…
• compiled a Materia medica
• Extracts of Materia medica of Boger,
Boericke, Clark, Hering and Kent.
• he found many clinical and pathological
symptoms
 Second edition-1977
• Clinical and pathological symptoms added
• 1977- October
• with the help of Dr. P. Sankaran (Jakap
Printers).
• Due to demand this book went for reprint
edition.
Dr. P sankaran
 PREFACE TO 2ND EDITION

• Author had gone through mms of HERING,

CLARKE, BOGER, BOERICKE, KENT
• Many clinical and pathological symptoms are
added
• This repertory was well received in America
and England
• 2nd edition was published by his friend Dr.P
Sankaran-expresses his gratitude……
• Given thanks to Dr. miss Homai for typing the
manuscript
 3rd edition-2000
• 23 years after 2nd E
• additions by Dr. D.S. Phatak
• in 2000
• B Jain Publishers
• additions by Dr. D.S. Phatak marked with
+ sign.
• Eg. Abdomen pain + coffee amel.
• No of pages are increased
• Given thanks to B Jain publishers
• PUBLISHERS NOTE – 4TH EDITION –column
begins as by Kuldeep Jain
• It is the alphabetized re working of Boger
and Boenninghausen
 CHANGES IN 4TH EDITION-2005

• 5 levels of rubrics are there

• In each level symptoms of previous level is
repeated
• Natural language has been maintained as far
as possible
• Though alphabetical, under rubrics of major
organs location ! complaints ! sensation
order is followed
• Locations right! left
• For stool, meses etc, before, during and
after are give
• 2 types of alternating symptoms
• Alternating sides –same organ/location
and other organs/ locations
• Additions are marked by + sign
• Gradations are the same
• Abbreviations are like Boger
• cross references- same level rubrics-
roman , different levels- CAPITALS
• General agg rubric-CAPITAL, particular-
ordinary
• each column begins with full details of
the rubric
 Editions

• First edition: 1963

• Second edition: 1977
• Third edition: 2000
• Fourth revised edition: 2005
 Gradations

• 3 grades like Kent

• First grade—CAPITAL
• Second grade---- italics
• Third grade--- roman
 Plan of construction

• printed in 2 columns in each page

• Unlike in Kent and Boenninghausen there
are no sections in repertory.
• All the headings are arranged
alphabetically
• repertory begins with Abdomen:
affections in general and ends in
Zygomae.
• All the physiological or pathological
conditions, mental symptoms, generals,
particulars are arranged alphabetically.
• Cross references are given where ever
necessary. eg: Sarcoma-see Fungus
growths.
• To every symptom modalities and
concomitants are given
 Modalities…
• General -capitals AGG OR AMEL
• particular - small letters Agg or Amel
• Eg: eyes closing AGG (general agg)
• Eyes cold application Agg (particular
modality)
 Generalisations………
• Appreciates Boger for his remarkable
ability for generalizing a symptom
• Eg. Awkwardness is given in Kent –
EXTREMITIES, Boger raised it to mental
and physical, a person can be awkward
mentally as well as physically
 New rubrics…
• Dr.phatak coined new rubrics
• eg. unsteady sensation
• this patient whenever he used to stand
more than a few minutes , used to feel
unsteady
 Some practical/ tips…..
• Modalities and concomitants are most
important in a case
• Advised leraning of mm along with repertory
• Holding breath amel. Is a rubric from BTP ,
author used this in a case of TAO
• Every remedy, high or low grade is important
• He believed in QUALITATIVE TOTALITY
• All modalities are not important
• Positional modalities are most important –
eg strange positions ( unusual modalities)
• Modalities which are not related with the
disease are most valuable
 A case…….
• In a case of peripheral neuritis (non DM) ,
patient had pain in both legs amel moving
, patient had amel from belching and
passing flatus .
• He raised this symptom to general
• took rubric passing flatus up and down
amel. From Boger rep.
• Desires and cravings are two separate
rubrics
• Under desires……all mental rubrics. Eg:
desire: change, always more than she
needs
• Under cravings………regarding food and
drinks.
• Eg: craving: coffee, black
ashes
• Under aversion………. both mental and
food aversions are given.
• “FOOD AND DRINKS,
• AGG and AMEL”
• under that all the agg and amel of food
stuffs are given.
• Indian foods are included:
• Chilies agg, tamarind water agg.
• Rubrics and remedies are reduced to
minimum. Eg: spondylitis, cervical: Phos-
ac
• Eg: Spoonerism- Interchange of initial
sounds of two words- new rubric /new
termonology
Rubrics from other repertories…
• incorporated some rubrics from Boger’s
Synoptic Key
• e.g.: itching ,in diabetes
• From TPB
• holding the breath>
 Rubric construction

• Location/sensations, affections in general

• Side- right
• Left
• Alternating sides
• Extension
• Sublocation/ subsensation, Aggravation,
Amelioration and concomitants are
intermingled and given alphabetically.
Eg: EARS
RIGHT
LEFT
ALTERNATING
Abdomen with
BETWEEN
GLANDS, OF
ABSCESS
COLD Agg
DISCHARGE
Deafness with
 Merits

• 1. It is a hand book for easy reference.

• 2. Alphabetical arrangement of rubrics.
• 3. Limited number of remedies and rubrics.
• 4. Under food and drinks Indian diet is given.
• 5. There are number of clinical and pathological rubrics.
• 6. It includes the clinical experience of many years
collected together.
• 7. More number of clinical rubrics is added than in
Kent’s repertory.
eg: acromegaly, arteriosclerosis
 Criticism:

• Mental symptoms are scattered

• Rubrics and remedies are minimized
• Exact sources of words not known
• A concise repertory can never replace exhaustive repertories
like Kent’s Repertory
• No full remedy index
• Certain rubrics are not defined well. Eg. Associated
effects ?, axilla menses before agg ?
• Fainting menses during, Menses faints at—Change in
medicines
• Spelling mistake
• Rare drugs are rarely represented though given in the
abbreviation after the preface
Thank you……