Enquirer Consulting Group

Reachable Buyer Map

Prepared for Michael Arcate, Life Biologics · August 2026
Here is the map, as promised. We did not guess at your market. We counted it, from the clinicians who actually applied a skin substitute at reportable Medicare volume, and then grouped them by who they are rather than by product category. One thing to say up front, because it changes how you read every number below: the most recent published year is 2024, which is the year before the January 2026 payment reset. This is the shape of the market going into that change, not a live count coming out of it. There is nothing to buy at the end of this page.
2,074
clinicians nationally applied a skin substitute at reportable volume in 2024, working out of 1,843 distinct practice addresses. That is not a sample of something larger. At that size the list can be finished rather than worked at forever, which is the single most useful thing about this market.
Nurse practitioners and physician assistants
The largest group applying these products is not a physician specialty at all, and it is not close. This lane is bigger than podiatry and dermatology put together. It is also the group least likely to be on a distributor call plan, because the call plan tends to be built around the physician who owns the practice rather than the person holding the graft. Treat this number as a floor, not a ceiling: under incident-to rules some applications performed by an NP are billed under a supervising physician's number instead of their own, so this undercounts the hands-on work rather than inflating it.
Who applies: nurse practitioners (619), physician assistants (157), clinical nurse specialists (4). Where they work: 675 of the 780 bill from the office setting only.
780
clinicians, 37.6% of everyone counted here and 37.1% of all applications
Dermatology, including Mohs reconstruction
Second largest by headcount, and the lane most likely to be misread. A large share of dermatology volume on these codes is reconstruction after skin cancer surgery, not chronic wound care. That is a different clinical problem, a different product conversation and a different buying rhythm. Counted here because they are genuinely applying the product category, flagged here because treating them as a chronic wound audience is the fastest way to waste a quarter.
Who applies: dermatologists (324) and micrographic dermatologic surgeons (46). Where they work: 363 of 370 bill from the office setting only, the most office-concentrated lane on this page.
370
clinicians, 17.8% of everyone counted and 15.5% of all applications
Podiatry
The lane the whole category is usually organized around, and it is third by headcount and fifth by intensity. Podiatrists average about 100 applications each across the year, which is the lowest of any lane counted here. That does not make the lane unimportant, it makes it the most competitive: it is where the entire industry's field force already is, so a rep entering it is arguing against incumbency rather than absence. Worth knowing before deciding where the next hire points.
Who applies: podiatrists (333). Where they work: 204 office only, the rest carry facility volume too, which is the widest office to facility spread of any lane here.
333
clinicians, 16.1% of everyone counted and 11.9% of all applications
Surgery: general, plastic and vascular
Fewer people, heavier use. This lane runs about 164 applications per clinician, well above podiatry, and it is the lane where your own site's second use case lives, the graft used inside a procedure rather than dressed onto a wound in clinic. It also behaves differently commercially: more of this volume sits in facility settings, where what gets stocked is decided further from the clinician than it is in an office.
Who applies: general surgeons (133), plastic and reconstructive surgeons (70), vascular surgeons (30). Where they work: only 109 of 233 are office only, the most facility-weighted lane counted here.
233
clinicians, 11.2% of everyone counted and 13.6% of all applications
Primary care
The quiet outlier on this page. Fewest clinicians of the five named lanes, but the highest intensity of any of them at roughly 203 applications per clinician, double the podiatry rate. These are mostly small offices carrying a chronic wound population they never set out to specialize in, and they are almost certainly not on anyone's target list under the label "wound care". If there is an underserved lane in this data, statistically this is it.
Who applies: family practice (112), internal medicine (65), general practice (19). Where they work: 147 of 196 office only.
196
clinicians, 9.5% of everyone counted and 14.2% of all applications
The long tail
Everyone else, spread across more than forty specialty labels, none large enough to be a lane of its own. Real volume, no shared route in, and not a market you can build a motion around. Listed for completeness so the page adds up rather than to suggest a play.
Largest fragments: emergency medicine (35), otolaryngology (22), orthopedic surgery (14), infectious disease (10), undersea and hyperbaric medicine (9).
162
clinicians, 7.8% of everyone counted and 7.6% of all applications
Which brand each of them actually stocks, the lane we will not put a number on
This is the number you would most want and it is the one we will not invent. The codes counted on this page pay the clinician for the act of applying a skin substitute. They do not record which product was applied, so nothing in this data separates an amniotic graft from a collagen, a synthetic or a competing allograft. A brand-level count would look exactly like the others on this page and mean something entirely different. That separation is done by hand, account by account, or it is not done honestly at all.
What this does tell you: who is applying the category, how often, and where. What it cannot tell you: whose product they opened, or who inside the practice chose it.
Deliberately uncounted
the public data cannot answer it, so we would rather show none than show a number you would have to defend later

Where the openings are

1
The biggest applier group in the country is one that field forces are not built to call on. Nurse practitioners and physician assistants are 780 of the 2,074, more than podiatry and dermatology combined, and 675 of them work office only. A field model organized around the physician who owns the practice systematically talks past the person actually holding the graft. This is the clearest gap on the page and it is a coverage problem rather than a product problem, which is the kind that can be fixed deliberately rather than hoped at.
2
About 200 clinicians do over 40% of the work. The top decile, 207 people, accounts for 42.7% of all applications counted here; the top quarter accounts for 64.8%. A universe of 2,074 that concentrates that hard is not really a coverage problem at all, it is a named-account problem with roughly 200 names in it. Those two facts point at completely different go to market designs, and the data says the second one is closer to the truth.
3
Intensity does not follow headcount, and the ranking is inverted from the industry's habit. Applications per clinician run roughly: primary care 203, surgery 164, nurse practitioners and PAs 133, dermatology 117, podiatry 100. The lane with the fewest people has the heaviest users, and the lane the category is organized around has the lightest. If territory value is being estimated by counting clinicians, it is being estimated backwards.
4
Three states hold about 39% of the market, and the heavy end is more concentrated still. California 313, Florida 309 and Texas 193 make 815 of the 2,074. Inside the top decile it tightens further: California 66, Florida 35, Texas 19, so a third of the highest-volume clinicians in the country sit in two states. That is a real argument for depth over national coverage, and it is a cheap argument to test.
5
The heaviest billers are not automatically the best targets, and 2026 is going to prove it. Median intensity here is 4 applications per Medicare patient. At least 57 clinicians run above 10, in a category the HHS Office of Inspector General flagged for questionable billing in September 2025. A target list sorted purely by 2024 volume will put some of those names at the top. Worth screening before it becomes a relationship, particularly given the January 2026 reset is designed to take most of the economics out of exactly that behavior.
Built from the public federal Medicare physician and other practitioners file, 2024 release, pulled on 26 August 2026 and filtered to the eight skin substitute application codes, then collapsed from billing rows onto distinct clinicians and distinct practice addresses. Four limits worth knowing, because they bound every number above. Providers treating fewer than eleven patients on a code are suppressed in the public file, so this counts clinicians at reportable volume rather than everyone who ever applied a graft. It is traditional Medicare only, so Medicare Advantage, commercial, veterans and self pay sit outside it. It counts the application procedure, not the product, so it cannot be read as brand or category share. And 2024 is the most recent published year, which puts it before the January 2026 payment change, so treat it as the baseline the market is moving from rather than a live picture.
ENQUIRER CONSULTING GROUP
enquirerconsulting.com