Has Jessica Hooper, MD received payments from drug or device companies?

Yes. Drug and device makers reported $145,175 in general payments to Jessica Hooper, MD across 198 transactions between 2019–2025. Most Open Payments records nationally are meals worth under $20; a reported payment is not evidence of wrongdoing.

Does a payment mean Jessica Hooper, MD did something wrong?

No. Federal law requires drug and device makers to report almost every transfer of value to a physician, including a $14 sandwich at a lunch presentation. Consulting fees, research funding and royalties to device inventors are ordinary, legal parts of medicine. This site reports what was disclosed; it makes no allegation.

Where does this information about Jessica Hooper, MD come from?

The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Payments come from Open Payments, published under the Physician Payments Sunshine Act. Billing and prescribing figures come from the Medicare Physician & Other Practitioners and Part D Prescriber public use files for 2024.

Jessica Hooper, MD

Adult Reconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery · Stanford, CANPI 1780095802

Payments from drug & device makers

What this record shows

This record is dominated by consulting fees: $97,876 of the $145,175 with a category attached, or 67.4%. Smith+Nephew accounts for 99.3% of it on its own, with 7 other manufacturers making up the rest.

$145,175in general payments, 2019–2025

Across 198 payments — averaging $733.20 each. Meals, travel, consulting and speaking fees, gifts and royalties reported by drug and device makers.

Smith+Nephew$144K
Stryker$383
Zimmer Biomet$192
Onkos Surgical, Inc.$183
Exactech, Inc.$103
Orthopediatrics Corp.$50
plus $61 from 2 others

What the payments were for

Consulting fees$97,87667%
Speaking & faculty fees$12,8509%
Travel & lodging$24,80517%
Food & beverage$9,6437%

General payments by program year

Who reported the general payments

Companies are grouped under their corporate parent — a single manufacturer often files under several CMS reporting entities. Research and ownership payments are counted separately and are not in this table.

Company	Payments	Total
Smith+Nephew	186	$144,202
Stryker	3	$383
Zimmer Biomet	2	$192
Onkos Surgical, Inc.	2	$183
Exactech, Inc.	2	$103
Orthopediatrics Corp.	1	$50
Johnson & Johnson	1	$33
Medacta USA, Inc.	1	$28

What the payments were tied to

Products named in the reported payments. Only payments of $100 or more are attributed here — the typical reported payment nationally is a meal worth about $16, and listing those product-by-product would be noise.

How this compares

$145,175 in reported general payments places this provider in the 80th percentile of 136 adult reconstructive orthopaedic surgery providers in California.

See all adult reconstructive orthopaedic surgery providers in California →

Medicare billing

Part B allowed, 2024

$175,567

Medicare patients

309

Services billed

553

What this is not: this is the amount Original Medicare Part B allowed for services this provider billed in 2024. It is not their income. It excludes Medicare Advantage — now more than half of all Medicare enrollment — along with Medicaid and all commercial insurance, and it is gross practice revenue before staff, rent, supplies and malpractice premiums. CMS also suppresses any figure covering ten or fewer patients, so low-volume providers appear smaller than they are.

Other adult reconstructive orthopaedic surgery in Stanford

William MaloneyStanford$11.1M
James HuddlestonStanford$1.5M
Derek AmanatullahStanford$828K
Matthew MillerStanford$93K
Jason LipofStanford$51K
Stuart GoodmanStanford$23K
James CaillouetteNewport Beach$4.8M
William LongLos Angeles$2.8M
John DearbornMenlo Park$2.5M
William Bugbeela Jolla$2.1M

See the full list for California →

Where these figures come from

Payments: CMS Open Payments, program years 2019–2025 (publication P06302026_06032026).
Billing: Medicare Physician & Other Practitioners, data year 2024. Original Medicare Part B only.
Identity: NPPES NPI Registry, July 2026.

Is this you, or does something look wrong? →