New physician payment data show critical care physicians generated median gross billings of more than C$640,000 in British Columbia. Critical care physicians recorded median gross physician billings of C$642,935 in British Columbia, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for intensivists assessing practice revenue within Canada's healthcare system. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that critical care physicians recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$642,935 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. While British Columbia reports a dedicated critical care category, an equivalent critical care category is not separately reported in the Manitoba dataset, meaning a direct provincial comparison is not possible from the available data. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$642,935 for critical care physicians. The Manitoba physician payment disclosures published within the Open Compensation analysis do not include a standalone critical care specialty category, preventing a like-for-like comparison between the two provinces. This highlights an important limitation when interpreting provincial physician billing data, as specialty classifications and reporting methodologies are not always aligned. It is also important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Why critical care billings are at this level Critical care medicine involves the continuous management of critically ill patients requiring complex monitoring and advanced organ support, often delivered in intensive care units. Patient management frequently includes invasive procedures, mechanical ventilation, haemodynamic monitoring, bedside ultrasound, multidisciplinary decision-making and repeated daily reviews. The intensity of care, combined with procedural activity and ongoing patient management, contributes to significant fee-for-service billing opportunities where applicable. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of providing critical care services, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice and hospital-related operating expenses Monitoring and diagnostic equipment Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, a critical care physician's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements, which are common within critical care medicine. What this means for critical care physicians For intensivists benchmarking their practice activity, the findings provide a useful indication of gross fee-for-service billings within British Columbia. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in hospital funding models, provincial reimbursement systems, employment arrangements and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available using comparable specialty classifications, a clearer picture of how critical care billings vary across Canada will emerge. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show anesthesiologists generated significantly higher median gross billings in British Columbia than in Manitoba. Anesthesiologists recorded median gross physician billings of C$613,899 in British Columbia, compared with C$414,843 in Manitoba, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for anesthesiologists comparing practice revenue across provincial healthcare systems. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that anesthesiologists recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$613,899 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. The findings place anesthesiology among the higher-billing physician specialties in both provinces, reflecting the specialty's essential role in surgical, obstetric and procedural care delivered within Canada's fee-for-service healthcare system. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$613,899 for anesthesiologists, compared with C$414,843 in Manitoba. The C$199,056 difference means median anesthesiology billings were approximately 48% higher in British Columbia than in Manitoba. While provincial fee schedules, reimbursement systems, surgical activity and practice models differ, the findings illustrate how gross physician billings can vary across Canadian healthcare systems. It is important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Practice expenses—including staffing, professional costs, equipment and other operating expenses—will reduce the amount ultimately retained by individual physicians. Why anesthesiology billings are at this level Anesthesiology combines perioperative patient management with continuous involvement in surgical procedures, obstetric care and other interventions requiring anaesthesia or sedation. General and regional anaesthesia, obstetric epidurals, procedural sedation, perioperative assessments and pain management services all contribute to fee-for-service activity. The combination of procedure-based work, operating theatre commitments and high clinical demand can support substantial levels of gross billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of providing anesthesiology services, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice and office expenses Medical and monitoring equipment Professional consumables Professional indemnity and regulatory costs Other operating overheads Consequently, an anesthesiologist's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements, which are used in some hospitals and healthcare systems. What this means for anesthesiologists For anesthesiologists benchmarking their practice or evaluating opportunities in different provinces, the findings provide a useful indication of how gross fee-for-service billings can vary across Canada. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in operating room activity, reimbursement schedules, case complexity and practice arrangements all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available, specialty-specific comparisons will provide a clearer picture of how anesthesiology billings vary across Canada's healthcare systems. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show plastic surgeons generated median gross billings of more than C$600,000 in British Columbia. Plastic surgeons recorded median gross physician billings of C$602,498 in British Columbia, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for plastic surgeons assessing practice revenue within Canada's healthcare system. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that plastic surgeons recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$602,498 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. While British Columbia reports a dedicated plastic surgery category, an equivalent plastic surgery category is not separately reported in the Manitoba dataset, meaning a direct provincial comparison is not possible using the available published data. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$602,498 for plastic surgeons. The Manitoba physician payment disclosures published within the Open Compensation analysis do not include a standalone plastic surgery specialty category, preventing a like-for-like comparison between the two provinces. This reflects differences in how provincial physician payment data are categorised and reported, rather than an absence of plastic surgery services. It is also important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Why plastic surgery billings are at this level Plastic surgery combines specialist consultations with a wide range of reconstructive and procedural interventions, many of which attract fee-for-service reimbursement. Reconstructive surgery following trauma or cancer treatment, hand surgery, skin cancer reconstruction, microsurgery and other operative procedures all contribute to billable clinical activity. The specialty's combination of complex surgery, outpatient consultations and follow-up care can support substantial levels of gross billings. It is important to recognise that these data relate to publicly funded physician billings and do not include privately funded cosmetic procedures, which may represent a significant component of practice for some plastic surgeons. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating a plastic surgery practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Surgical facilities and procedure costs Specialist surgical equipment Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, a plastic surgeon's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments within the publicly funded healthcare system and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for plastic surgeons For plastic surgeons benchmarking their practice activity, the findings provide a useful indication of gross fee-for-service billings within British Columbia's publicly funded healthcare system. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in case mix, reconstructive versus cosmetic practice, operating costs and reimbursement arrangements all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available using comparable specialty classifications, a clearer picture of how plastic surgery billings vary across Canada will emerge. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show orthopedic surgeons generated higher median gross billings in Manitoba than in British Columbia. Orthopedic surgeons recorded median gross physician billings of C$593,685 in British Columbia, compared with C$639,365 in Manitoba, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for orthopedic surgeons comparing practice revenue across provincial healthcare systems. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that orthopedic surgeons recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$593,685 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. The findings show that orthopedic surgery remains one of the highest-billing physician specialties in both provinces, reflecting the specialty's high procedural workload and central role in managing musculoskeletal disease and trauma. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$593,685 for orthopedic surgeons, compared with C$639,365 in Manitoba. The C$45,680 difference means median orthopedic surgery billings were approximately 7.7% higher in Manitoba than in British Columbia. While provincial fee schedules, reimbursement systems, surgical volumes and practice models differ, the findings illustrate how gross physician billings can vary across Canadian healthcare systems. It is important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Practice expenses—including staffing, premises, surgical equipment and other operating costs—will significantly reduce the amount ultimately retained by individual physicians. Why orthopedic surgery billings are at this level Orthopedic surgery combines specialist consultations with a high volume of operative procedures, trauma care and follow-up management, creating multiple billable activities throughout the patient pathway. Joint replacement surgery, fracture fixation, arthroscopic procedures, sports injury management, hand surgery and postoperative care all contribute to fee-for-service activity. The specialty's procedural focus, together with ongoing outpatient care, can support consistently high levels of gross billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating an orthopedic surgery practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Surgical facilities Orthopedic instruments and diagnostic equipment Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, an orthopedic surgeon's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for orthopedic surgeons For orthopedic surgeons benchmarking their practice or considering opportunities in different provinces, the findings provide a useful indication of how gross fee-for-service billings can vary across Canada. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in surgical case mix, operating room availability, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available, specialty-specific comparisons will provide a clearer picture of how orthopedic surgery billings vary across Canada's healthcare systems. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show neurosurgeons generated median gross billings of nearly C$590,000 in British Columbia. Neurosurgeons recorded median gross physician billings of C$588,226 in British Columbia, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for neurosurgeons assessing practice revenue within Canada's healthcare system. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that neurosurgeons recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$588,226 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. While British Columbia reports a dedicated neurosurgery category, an equivalent neurosurgery category is not separately reported in the Manitoba dataset, meaning a direct provincial comparison is not possible using the available published data. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$588,226 for neurosurgeons. The Manitoba physician payment disclosures published within the Open Compensation analysis do not include a standalone neurosurgery specialty category, preventing a like-for-like comparison between the two provinces. This reflects differences in how provincial physician payment data are categorised and reported, rather than an absence of neurosurgical services. It is also important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Why neurosurgery billings are at this level Neurosurgery combines highly specialised consultations with complex operative procedures involving the brain, spine and peripheral nervous system. The specialty typically manages patients requiring technically demanding interventions, intensive perioperative care and long-term follow-up. Cranial surgery, spinal procedures, tumour resections, trauma surgery, vascular neurosurgery and image-guided interventions all contribute to fee-for-service activity. The combination of complex surgery and ongoing specialist management can support substantial levels of gross billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating a neurosurgical practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Surgical facilities Specialist neurosurgical equipment Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, a neurosurgeon's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for neurosurgeons For neurosurgeons benchmarking their practice activity, the findings provide a useful indication of gross fee-for-service billings within British Columbia. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in case complexity, operating room access, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available using comparable specialty classifications, a clearer picture of how neurosurgery billings vary across Canada will emerge. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show obstetrician-gynaecologists generated significantly higher median gross billings in British Columbia than in Manitoba. Obstetrician-gynaecologists recorded median gross physician billings of C$567,094 in British Columbia, compared with C$446,391 in Manitoba, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for obstetrician-gynaecologists comparing practice revenue across provincial healthcare systems. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that obstetrician-gynaecologists recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$567,094 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. The findings place obstetrics and gynaecology among the higher-billing physician specialties in both provinces, reflecting the specialty's combination of outpatient care, procedural activity and surgical services within Canada's fee-for-service healthcare system. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$567,094 for obstetrician-gynaecologists, compared with C$446,391 in Manitoba. The C$120,703 difference means median obstetrics and gynaecology billings were approximately 27% higher in British Columbia than in Manitoba. While provincial fee schedules, reimbursement systems, patient volumes and practice models differ, the findings illustrate how gross physician billings can vary across Canadian healthcare systems. It is important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Practice expenses—including staffing, premises, medical equipment and other operating costs—will significantly reduce the amount ultimately retained by individual physicians. Why obstetrics and gynaecology billings are at this level Obstetrics and gynaecology combines routine outpatient care with procedural and surgical services across women's health, pregnancy and reproductive medicine. Antenatal care, labour and delivery, caesarean sections, gynaecological surgery, colposcopy, hysteroscopy and ongoing outpatient management all contribute to fee-for-service activity. The combination of continuity of care, emergency cover and procedural work can support substantial levels of gross billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating an obstetrics and gynaecology practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Surgical and delivery facilities Medical and diagnostic equipment Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, an obstetrician-gynaecologist's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for obstetrician-gynaecologists For obstetrician-gynaecologists benchmarking their practice or considering opportunities in different provinces, the findings provide a useful indication of how gross fee-for-service billings can vary across Canada. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in delivery volumes, surgical case mix, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available, specialty-specific comparisons will provide a clearer picture of how obstetrics and gynaecology billings vary across Canada's healthcare systems. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show cardiac surgeons generated median gross billings of more than C$559,000 in British Columbia. Cardiac surgeons recorded median gross physician billings of C$559,313 in British Columbia, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for cardiac surgeons assessing practice revenue within Canada's healthcare system. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that cardiac surgeons recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$559,313 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. While British Columbia reports a dedicated cardiac surgery category, an equivalent cardiac surgery category is not separately reported in the Manitoba dataset, meaning a direct provincial comparison is not possible using the available published data. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$559,313 for cardiac surgeons. The Manitoba physician payment disclosures published within the Open Compensation analysis do not include a standalone cardiac surgery specialty category, preventing a like-for-like comparison between the two provinces. This reflects differences in how provincial physician payment data are categorised and reported, rather than an absence of cardiac surgery services. It is also important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Why cardiac surgery billings are at this level Cardiac surgery is one of the most technically demanding procedural specialties, combining highly specialised operative care with intensive perioperative management of patients with complex cardiovascular disease. Coronary artery bypass grafting, heart valve surgery, aortic procedures, minimally invasive cardiac interventions and postoperative follow-up all contribute to fee-for-service activity. The combination of lengthy operative procedures, multidisciplinary care and ongoing specialist management can support substantial levels of gross billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating a cardiac surgery practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Surgical facilities Specialist cardiac surgical equipment Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, a cardiac surgeon's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for cardiac surgeons For cardiac surgeons benchmarking their practice activity, the findings provide a useful indication of gross fee-for-service billings within British Columbia. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in surgical case complexity, operating theatre availability, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available using comparable specialty classifications, a clearer picture of how cardiac surgery billings vary across Canada will emerge. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show internal medicine physicians generated significantly higher median gross billings in British Columbia than in Manitoba. Internal medicine physicians recorded median gross physician billings of C$554,887 in British Columbia, compared with C$358,013 in Manitoba, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for internists comparing practice revenue across provincial healthcare systems. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that internal medicine physicians recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$554,887 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. The findings highlight a substantial difference in median gross billings between the two provinces, reinforcing the importance of provincial reimbursement structures and practice patterns when benchmarking physician billings. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$554,887 for internal medicine physicians, compared with C$358,013 in Manitoba. The C$196,874 difference means median internal medicine billings were approximately 55% higher in British Columbia than in Manitoba. While provincial fee schedules, reimbursement systems, patient complexity and practice models differ, the findings illustrate how gross physician billings can vary across Canadian healthcare systems. It is important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Practice expenses—including staffing, premises, diagnostic equipment and other operating costs—will significantly reduce the amount ultimately retained by individual physicians. Why internal medicine billings are at this level Internal medicine combines comprehensive specialist consultations with the diagnosis and long-term management of complex adult medical conditions across both inpatient and outpatient settings. Internists frequently manage patients with multiple chronic diseases, coordinate multidisciplinary care, perform diagnostic assessments and provide ongoing follow-up for conditions affecting several organ systems. This combination of high clinical complexity, consultation activity and continuity of care contributes to substantial fee-for-service billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating an internal medicine practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Diagnostic equipment Information technology and electronic medical record systems Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, an internist's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for internal medicine physicians For internists benchmarking their practice or considering opportunities in different provinces, the findings provide a useful indication of how gross fee-for-service billings can vary across Canada. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in patient complexity, consultation volumes, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available, specialty-specific comparisons will provide a clearer picture of how internal medicine billings vary across Canada's healthcare systems. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show endocrinologists generated median gross billings of more than C$539,000 in British Columbia. Endocrinologists recorded median gross physician billings of C$539,040 in British Columbia, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for endocrinologists assessing practice revenue within Canada's healthcare system. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that endocrinologists recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$539,040 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. While British Columbia reports a dedicated endocrinology category, an equivalent category is not reported separately in the Manitoba dataset, so a direct provincial comparison is not possible using the available published data. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$539,040 for endocrinologists. The Manitoba physician payment disclosures published within the Open Compensation analysis do not include a standalone endocrinology specialty category, preventing a like-for-like comparison between the two provinces. This reflects differences in how provincial physician payment data are categorised and reported, rather than an absence of endocrinology services. It is also important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Why endocrinology billings are at this level Endocrinology focuses on the diagnosis and long-term management of hormonal and metabolic disorders, requiring ongoing specialist input across a wide range of chronic conditions. Management of diabetes, thyroid disease, osteoporosis, adrenal disorders, pituitary conditions and other endocrine diseases often involves regular consultations, interpretation of laboratory investigations, treatment optimisation and long-term patient follow-up. The combination of specialist expertise and continuity of care contributes to substantial fee-for-service billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating an endocrinology practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Diagnostic and monitoring equipment Information technology and electronic medical record systems Medical consumables Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, an endocrinologist's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for endocrinologists For endocrinologists benchmarking their practice activity, the findings provide a useful indication of gross fee-for-service billings within British Columbia. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in patient complexity, consultation volumes, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available using comparable specialty classifications, a clearer picture of how endocrinology billings vary across Canada will emerge. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show dermatologists generated higher median gross billings in British Columbia than in Manitoba. Dermatologists recorded median gross physician billings of C$535,949 in British Columbia, compared with C$500,478 in Manitoba, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for dermatologists comparing practice revenue across provincial healthcare systems. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that dermatologists recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$535,949 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. The findings show dermatology remains one of the higher-billing physician specialties in both provinces, reflecting the specialty's combination of outpatient consultations, diagnostic procedures and therapeutic interventions. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$535,949 for dermatologists, compared with C$500,478 in Manitoba. The C$35,471 difference means median dermatology billings were approximately 7% higher in British Columbia than in Manitoba. While provincial fee schedules, reimbursement systems, patient volumes and practice models differ, the findings illustrate how gross physician billings can vary across Canadian healthcare systems. It is important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Practice expenses—including staffing, premises, clinical equipment and other operating costs—will significantly reduce the amount ultimately retained by individual physicians. Why dermatology billings are at this level Dermatology combines high-volume outpatient consultations with a wide range of diagnostic and procedural services, creating multiple billable activities across the patient pathway. Skin cancer diagnosis and treatment, biopsies, lesion excisions, cryotherapy, phototherapy, patch testing and the long-term management of chronic inflammatory skin diseases all contribute to fee-for-service activity. The combination of consultation-based care and office-based procedures can support substantial levels of gross billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating a dermatology practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Diagnostic and procedural equipment Medical consumables Information technology and electronic medical record systems Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, a dermatologist's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for dermatologists For dermatologists benchmarking their practice or considering opportunities in different provinces, the findings provide a useful indication of how gross fee-for-service billings can vary across Canada. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in procedure volumes, case mix, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available, specialty-specific comparisons will provide a clearer picture of how dermatology billings vary across Canada's healthcare systems. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

New physician payment data show physical medicine physicians generated substantially higher median gross billings in Manitoba than in British Columbia. Physical medicine physicians recorded median gross physician billings of C$631,534 in Manitoba, compared with C$487,132 in British Columbia, according to a new analysis of Canadian physician payment disclosures. While the figures represent gross fee-for-service billings rather than take-home income, they provide a valuable benchmark for physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians comparing practice revenue across provincial healthcare systems. Key findings A new analysis of public physician payment disclosures found that physical medicine physicians recorded median gross fee-for-service billings of C$487,132 per physician in British Columbia. The analysis uses official physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25) to compare physician billings by specialty. The Manitoba dataset reports the specialty as Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, while British Columbia reports Physical Medicine, representing closely aligned specialty classifications for comparison. British Columbia versus Manitoba British Columbia recorded median gross physician billings of C$487,132 for physical medicine physicians, compared with C$631,534 in Manitoba. The C$144,402 difference means median physical medicine billings were approximately 30% higher in Manitoba than in British Columbia. While provincial fee schedules, reimbursement systems, patient populations and practice models differ, the findings illustrate how gross physician billings can vary across Canadian healthcare systems. It is important to note that these figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before practice overhead, rather than physician salary or take-home income. Practice expenses—including staffing, premises, rehabilitation equipment and other operating costs—will significantly reduce the amount ultimately retained by individual physicians. Why physical medicine billings are at this level Physical medicine and rehabilitation combines specialist consultations with diagnostic assessments and procedure-based interventions aimed at restoring function and improving quality of life for patients with musculoskeletal and neurological conditions. Physiatrists frequently manage patients requiring rehabilitation following stroke, spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, musculoskeletal disorders and chronic pain. Electromyography (EMG), nerve conduction studies, ultrasound-guided injections, spasticity management and other office-based procedures all contribute to fee-for-service activity. The combination of specialist expertise, procedural work and long-term patient management can support substantial gross billings. Gross billings are not take-home pay The figures reported represent gross physician billings, not physician salaries or personal income. These billings typically cover the cost of operating a physical medicine and rehabilitation practice, including: Clinical and administrative staff Practice premises Rehabilitation and diagnostic equipment Medical consumables Information technology and electronic medical record systems Professional indemnity and other overheads Consequently, a physical medicine physician's net income will be substantially lower than the published billing figures. The analysis also primarily reflects fee-for-service payments and does not fully capture physicians working under salaried or alternative funding arrangements. What this means for physical medicine physicians For physiatrists benchmarking their practice or considering opportunities in different provinces, the findings provide a useful indication of how gross fee-for-service billings can vary across Canada. However, billing figures should be interpreted as a measure of practice revenue rather than personal earnings. Differences in procedural activity, patient complexity, reimbursement schedules and operating costs all influence the amount physicians ultimately retain. As additional provincial payment disclosures become available, specialty-specific comparisons will provide a clearer picture of how physical medicine and rehabilitation billings vary across Canada's healthcare systems. Source Open Compensation. Which Medical Specialty Pays the Most in Canada? Physician Billings Ranked. Published 12 July 2026. The analysis uses physician payment disclosures from the British Columbia Medical Services Plan Blue Book (2024) and Manitoba Health (2024/25). Figures represent gross fee-for-service billings before overhead and should not be interpreted as physician salary or net income. Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com

The acquisition gives BioMarin access to ALE1, a potential first oral treatment for hypophosphatasia, while expanding its rare disease pipeline with a clinical-stage skeletal disease programme. BioMarin has agreed to acquire Alesta Therapeutics for $275 million upfront, with Alesta shareholders eligible for up to a further $215 million in development and regulatory milestone payments, giving the transaction a potential value of up to $490 million. The acquisition centres on ALE1, a Phase I/IIa oral small-molecule therapy for hypophosphatasia (HPP), strengthening BioMarin's rare disease pipeline while allowing Alesta's remaining assets to be spun out into a new independent company before closing. Field Content Alert Type Deal Companies BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc.; Alesta Therapeutics Deal Type Acquisition Asset or Company Alesta Therapeutics, principally ALE1 Therapy Area(s) Rare diseases; Skeletal disorders; Metabolic bone disease Technology or Modality Oral small-molecule therapy Deal Value $275 million upfront, plus up to $215 million in development and regulatory milestone payments. The maximum potential consideration is up to $490 million, although the additional $215 million is contingent and not guaranteed. Development Stage Phase I/IIa Geography Global What Happened On 18 August 2026, BioMarin announced a definitive agreement to acquire Alesta Therapeutics. The acquisition centres on ALE1, an orally administered small-molecule therapy being evaluated in an ongoing Phase I/IIa trial for hypophosphatasia (HPP). Prior to closing, Alesta will spin out all non-ALE1 assets into a newly formed company, with existing shareholders retaining their proportional interest. The transaction has been approved by both companies' boards and is expected to close in the third quarter of 2026, subject to customary closing conditions. Why It Matters ALE1 expands BioMarin's clinical-stage rare disease pipeline with a programme targeting HPP, a rare inherited metabolic bone disorder. If successfully developed, ALE1 could become the first oral therapy for HPP, complementing BioMarin's existing expertise in rare genetic diseases while broadening its skeletal conditions portfolio. Clinical benefit and commercial success remain dependent on ongoing development and regulatory review. Supporting Context HPP is caused by mutations in the ALPL gene, resulting in impaired bone and tooth mineralisation. ALE1 is designed to reduce inorganic pyrophosphate levels and is being evaluated in healthy volunteers and adults with HPP in an ongoing Phase I/IIa clinical study. Strategic Rationale BioMarin gains a clinical-stage rare disease asset that aligns with its established focus on genetic disorders, while Alesta's remaining pipeline will continue in a separate spinout company rather than transferring as part of the acquisition. Potential Impact If ALE1 demonstrates favourable safety and efficacy, the acquisition could expand BioMarin's leadership in rare skeletal diseases with a potential first oral treatment for HPP. Any clinical or commercial impact will depend on successful trial outcomes, regulatory approval and completion of the transaction. Key Takeaway The acquisition gives BioMarin a clinical-stage oral therapy for hypophosphatasia while reinforcing its strategy of expanding its rare disease pipeline through targeted acquisitions. What to Watch Completion of the acquisition, progression of the ongoing Phase I/IIa study, future development and regulatory milestones for ALE1, and the establishment of Alesta's spinout company. Primary Source https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/biomarin-to-acquire-alesta-therapeutics-to-gain-ale1-a-potential-first-oral-therapy-for-hypophosphatasia-adding-an-important-clinical-program-to-biomarins-pipeline-302854068.html Relevant Date 18 August 2026 Discover how nuaxia can support your next medical education initiative: Find out more about our specialist services - Moore's Outcome Assessments, Educational Needs Assessments and Patient Impact Studies for the Medical Education sector Contact us on: support@nuaxia.com