Douglas S Lister, DPM
See where Douglas S Lister, DPM ranks among 149 Podiatry peers
The Physician Report shows Medicare work, payment, the comparison with similar practices and the trend across the data years.
Reports are not on sale yet.
View sample reportWhat the Physician Report contains
Show details13 known limitations
Included
- Exact Medicare payment figures for each data year
- Calculated Medicare fee-for-service work RVUs for each data year
- Historical results for every data year with usable data
- Peer comparisons: rank, percentile and rank band among the same specialty, the peer medians, and where the physician falls in the peer distribution
- Beneficiaries, services, service mix and code-level lines
- A printable report with the data years, methodology and limitations
Not included
- Other physicians' figures and ranks
- The market's cohort table, percentile table and market trend (the Market Comparison)
- Peer comparison flags (professional subscription, not sold)
Known limitations
- CMS suppresses code lines with fewer than 11 beneficiaries, so calculated work RVUs are a floor.
- 2013: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (111).
- 2014: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (111).
- 2015: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (117).
- 2016: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (122).
- 2017: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (124).
- 2018: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (129).
- 2019: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (133).
- 2020: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (133).
- 2021: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (134).
- 2022: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (142).
- 2023: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (149).
- 2024: fewer than 20 peers in the metro, so ranks and percentiles use state peers (149).
Available data
- years in the data
- 12
- peers in the 2024 peer group
- 149
- a report can be prepared
- Yes
Data by year12 of 12 published
| Data year | In the CMS file | Usable for a report | Peer group for ranks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 111 |
| 2014 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 111 |
| 2015 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 117 |
| 2016 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 122 |
| 2017 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 124 |
| 2018 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 129 |
| 2019 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 133 |
| 2020 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 133 |
| 2021 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 134 |
| 2022 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 142 |
| 2023 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 149 |
| 2024 | Yes | Yes | state peers, 149 |
Years Douglas S Lister, DPM is in the CMS Medicare Physician & Other Practitioners files. Ranks use same-specialty peers in the first of the metro, the state and the nation with at least 20 peers. How ranks are computed · Limitations
Where Douglas S Lister, DPM practices
- Credentials
- DPM
- Specialty on claims
- Podiatry
- Practice location on Medicare claims
- Park City, UTHeber, UT metroStreet address not shown unless the clinician turns it on.
- Medicare participation
- Participating (accepts assignment on all claims)
- Years in the data
- 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 (12 of 12 published)
Groups
Hospitals
- Adventist Health Mendocino Coast · Fort Bragg, CA
Source: CMS Doctors and Clinicians files, snapshot 2026-10-02. May lag reality.
Practice location and specialty by year
Show details12 years
The practice location (Park City, UT) and specialty (Podiatry) on the claims are the same in every year in the data.
| Data year | Practice location on Medicare claims | Area | Specialty on claims |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2014 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2015 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2016 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2017 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2018 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2019 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2020 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2021 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2022 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2023 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
| 2024 | Park City, UT | Heber, UT | Podiatry |
From the provider fields of each year's CMS Medicare Physician & Other Practitioners file (the location and specialty on the claims, as CMS publishes them).
Peer group a report would use
Show details149 peers
For 2024, a Physician Report would place Douglas S Lister, DPM in a peer group of 149 Podiatry clinicians, Douglas S Lister, DPM included, at the state level (Utah).
Peers are clinicians with the same specialty on their claims, in the first of the metro area, the state and the nation that has enough of them. The sizes for every year are in the table under Available data.
About this data
Show details
This page comes from public files the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services publishes each year: the Medicare Physician & Other Practitioners files, which list the Part B services each clinician billed to Original Medicare, and the Doctors and Clinicians files, which list group and hospital affiliations. It covers Original Medicare fee-for-service only: Medicare Advantage, Medicaid and commercial insurance are not in these files, and CMS leaves out any service line with fewer than 11 beneficiaries. The location and specialty are what the claims show, and affiliations are as of the snapshot date, so either can lag a recent change. A listing here says nothing about quality of care.
How the data is processed · Known limitations · Report an error
Physicians can claim their page for notices and a statement. Claiming does not show figures; those are in a Physician Report.
Original Medicare Part B fee-for-service only. Payments go to the billing entity, not to the clinician. Limitations · Methodology