RxDoctor Payments Data

Scott Worswick, MD

Dermatology · Los Angeles, CANPI 1871733329

Payments from drug & device makers

What this record shows

This record is dominated by speaking fees: $47,200 of the $72,030 with a category attached, or 65.5%. Boehringer Ingelheim accounts for 95.8% of it on its own, with 16 other manufacturers making up the rest. Reporting peaked in 2023 at $39,808 and has fallen 91.6% since, to $3,344 in 2025. Among dermatology clinicians in CA with any reported payments, this total sits in the top 10% — high for the specialty, which is a reason to read the composition above rather than the number alone.

$72,030in general payments, 2019–2025

Across 124 payments — averaging $580.88 each. Meals, travel, consulting and speaking fees, gifts and royalties reported by drug and device makers.

  • Boehringer Ingelheim$69K
  • UCB, Inc.$723
  • E.r. Squibb & Sons, L.L.C.$628
  • AbbVie$475
  • Novartis$348
  • Dermavant Sciences, Inc.$148
  • plus $721 from 11 others

What the payments were for

  • Consulting fees$15,65522%
  • Speaking & faculty fees$47,20066%
  • Travel & lodging$4,0406%
  • Food & beverage$5,0627%
  • Education$720%

General payments by program year

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

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.

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

$72,030 in reported general payments places this provider in the 90th percentile of 1,875 dermatology providers in California.

See all dermatology providers in California →

Medicare billing

Part B allowed, 2024
$74,261
Medicare patients
275
Services billed
1,161

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.

Most prescribed under Part D

DrugClaimsCost to plans & patients
Skyrizi PenRisankizumab-Rzaa11$235,418
Humira(Cf) PenAdalimumab12$163,483
Cosentyx Sensoready (2 Pens)Secukinumab15$108,052
OtezlaApremilast22$102,838
Dupixent SyringeDupilumab24$91,977
Dupixent PenDupilumab22$82,073
Clobetasol Propionate20$4,609
Acitretin11$3,918
Timolol Maleate20$2,333
Ketoconazole96$1,338
Clindamycin Phosphate25$1,249
Tacrolimus12$1,097
Fluocinonide21$970
Betamethasone Dipropionate18$869
Triamcinolone Acetonide74$833

Paid to pharmacies, not to this prescriber.

Companies that both paid and supply prescribed drugs

These companies both reported payments to this provider and make drugs the provider prescribed under Medicare Part D in 2024. For most specialties this overlap is expected — a cardiologist who is paid by a cardiology drugmaker also treats heart disease. It is shown so the reader can see it, not because it implies anything on its own.

CompanyPaid to this providerPart D cost of their drugs
AmgenOtezla$32$102,83822 claims

Reading this fairly. The Part D column is what drug plans and patients paid pharmacies — this provider received none of it, and it reflects how many patients they treat and what those drugs cost. Against peers, this provider's reported payments sit in the 90th percentile of 1,875 dermatology providers in California.

Other dermatology in Los Angeles

See the full list for California →

Where these figures come from

Is this you, or does something look wrong? →