Reputation work in this field comes down to two decisions that often get made by accident: who gets asked for a review, and what a public reply is allowed to say. The asking is the safe half, as long as every patient gets the same invitation and nothing is offered in exchange. The answering is where a practice can confirm, in public, that a named person was a patient.
Book a free consultation →Someone considering a procedure is spending their own money on something nobody made them buy. They research privately, over weeks, usually on a phone, and they reach your reviews having already seen photos somewhere else. What many of them do next is consistent enough to plan around.
The general case for this service is made on our reputation management page, so this one stays on what changes when the business is a medical practice. The wider marketing picture for the field is on cosmetic surgery.
Asking is not the risky part. Asking selectively is. Every patient gets the same invitation, worded the same way, at the same point in the pathway, with nothing offered in return. That is the sanctioned form, and the version that holds up when a platform, a regulator or a patient looks closely.
Mechanically it is a short link, a text, or a QR code at the desk that puts a patient one tap from the review form. One thing we have built before is a one-tap review-request tool for a New Jersey glass and mirror shop, and the same machinery works in a practice once the clinical language comes out of the message and the trigger moves to the follow-up visit. Built for you it is a custom tool: coded for your pathway, and it stays yours.
Write every public response as though a regulator, an attorney, and the next patient will all read it, because they might. The rules are short and they do not bend.
The trap most practices miss is the happy review. Thanking someone by name for trusting Dr. Whoever with their procedure is the same disclosure as an angry rebuttal, just in a better mood. If the rule only applies to bad reviews, the rule is not being followed.
So the reply is one shape, used every time: thank the person for the feedback in general terms, state the standard the practice holds itself to, give a name and a direct number for anything further. It reads fine under a five star and under a one star, and it does not change depending on how the review made anyone feel. We draft them, a named person at the practice approves and posts, and nothing goes out under your name that nobody read. This is built with HIPAA-conscious handling in mind, which describes how we work rather than certifying anything, so have your own counsel sign off on the set once. Keeping the listing those replies sit on in order is covered on Google Business Profile for cosmetic surgeons.
Google is the loudest surface, not the only one. Patients here also read the aesthetics and health directories where reviews run long and narrative, general review sites, community threads where you have no account and no reply, and whatever an AI assistant says when someone asks who is good in their city.
Those surfaces do not share one rulebook. Yelp, for instance, asks businesses not to solicit reviews at all. So the invitation gets set to the strictest policy that applies where you are asking, instead of one blanket message pointed at every platform at once.
Monitoring means a new review lands in front of the person allowed to act on it, with a clock running on how long the answer took. It also means a first pass through what is already posted, replies included, because replies written before anyone thought about any of this are usually where the disclosures already sit.
An assistant answering who is good in a city works from whatever it can read about you: your pages, your listing, the reviews themselves. Where all three are thin, the answer gets assembled out of somebody else's pages instead. Nobody can promise you a place inside those answers, and a vendor who does is selling something they do not control. That surface is AI search work, and the free AI visibility checker shows what is being said about you today. How reviews feed map pack ranking is a separate argument, and it belongs to local SEO for cosmetic surgeons.
Your own site is a review surface too, with two extra rules here. A patient's words, name, or photo need that patient's written authorization first, and a testimonial that describes a result may fall under your board's advertising rules, so run the page past whoever advises you. Marking the reviews up so machines can read them is worth doing, but it will not put stars beside you in search results: reviews a business hosts about itself stopped earning that snippet years ago. Building those pages is website work for cosmetic surgeons.
Nothing begins until the work is scoped and the price is agreed. That is deliberate: no open-ended monthly retainer whose contents nobody can list back to you. You see the pieces, you see the number, then work starts. There is no per-review price and no subscription tier, because that is not how this is sold.
What decides the size of the job is rarely the request tool. It is how many listings carry your name, whether individual providers hold profiles of their own alongside the practice, how many replies are already posted and have to be read before anything new goes out, and whether your counsel wants to approve the reply set before it is used. A solo surgeon with one listing and forty posted reviews is a different scope from a three-location group with injectors reviewed under their own names.
The request side is a custom tool, quoted as a build rather than rented by the seat. Calculators start from $600 and most workhorse tools run $1,500 to $4,000, with a review-request setup toward the lighter end of that workhorse range, and Tool Care afterward is $75 a month per tool. Keep us for upkeep or do not: the tool is yours.
When requests, monitoring, and reply drafting ride along inside a broader search engagement, they are folded into that scope instead of billed on their own, and the monthly ranges for that work are set out on local SEO for cosmetic surgeons. Work that fits neither shape gets a flat number after the free consult. Everything ongoing is month to month, and you own the tool, the site, the content, and the accounts. The reviews were never ours to hold anyway: they live on your listing. How much SEO costs and how long SEO takes set expectations on the ongoing side.
The first pass is a read of what is already public, and in this field that is as much about your replies as your reviews. Somebody goes line by line through what has been posted under the practice name looking for a first name, a procedure, a date, a thank-you that confirmed more than it meant to. Where replies went up before anyone set rules for them, that sweep is likely to turn something up, and it is the one piece of this work that should not wait.
Then the rules go on paper. Who sends the invitation and on what trigger, who drafts a reply, who approves it, who posts it, and which reviews stop dead and go to your attorney or your carrier instead of being answered at all. A threatened board complaint, an injury claim, or a letter from a law firm is not a reply-drafting problem, and the time to decide that is before one arrives. After that it is just running: the tool wired to your listing, monitoring across the surfaces above, the approved reply shape used every time, and reviews on the site under the authorization rules above.
Reporting is short, and it is not a rating chart. How many invitations went out, what came back, how quickly each review got an answer, and where the process slipped. Two things stay off the table. We do not write, buy, or incentivize reviews, which in a medical practice is worse than a policy problem: an invented patient story is a public claim about care that never happened. And we do not screen who gets the public invitation, since an average lifted that way breaks platform policy and the FTC has treated it as deceptive.
Kelly Webmasters and Marketers is Orlando-based, working with local service businesses nationwide since 2008, and the person who scopes this is the person who builds it. Call or text (407) 694-2055, or request a quote, and we will open your listing on the phone with you. If you would rather see work before you talk scope, a free mockup costs nothing and you keep it, and how we build covers the method behind the tools.
Pick one moment that happens to every patient and hold it. A common choice is the post-op follow-up visit, or a fixed number of days after it, when the early swelling and the early anxiety have both settled. What matters more than the moment you choose is that it is the same moment for everyone, decided in advance rather than by how a visit felt.
No, and this is the one that catches careful practices. A first name, a provider, or a procedure in the reply confirms in public that the person was a patient and what was done. Use the same neutral shape you use for a complaint: thanks for the feedback, here is the standard we hold, here is a name and a number.
No. Google's policies do not allow offering anything of value for a review, and the FTC's 2024 rule bans rewards tied to a review saying something positive. In aesthetics the temptation runs higher because there is always product on the shelf, which is exactly why the rule has to be written down and known at the front desk.
Flag it through the platform, since a review from someone with no experience of your business generally breaks the platform's own policies, and sometimes it comes down. What you cannot do is reply in public saying the person is not in your records. A denial is still a statement about your records. The safe reply says nothing either way.
Slow down and use one neutral response everywhere, with no clinical detail and no timeline, pointing to a named person and a direct line. Do not post photos, dates, or chart facts to correct the account, however wrong it is. Tell your carrier and your attorney early rather than after the fourth reply, because a complaint about a result can travel somewhere other than a review site.
Not with the same message, and in some cases not at all. Yelp asks businesses not to solicit reviews, and other sites have their own terms, so one blanket request pointed everywhere is how a practice breaks a rule it never read. We set the ask to the strictest policy that applies, and monitor the rest rather than soliciting on them.
Nothing about what patients write, because that part is theirs. What you can hold us to is process: the invitation reaches everyone on the same trigger, new reviews reach the person allowed to answer them, drafts come to a human at your practice instead of posting themselves, no reply goes public that nobody read, and the report says plainly what happened, including the quiet months.
Reputation Management services · Cosmetic surgery practices: industry overview · SEO for cosmetic surgery practices · Local SEO for cosmetic surgery practices · Websites for cosmetic surgery practices · Google Business Profile for cosmetic surgery practices · Social media for cosmetic surgery practices · What should you pay? (free tool)
We will read what is already posted under your name, for free: how recent the reviews are, how many got an answer, and whether any reply on the page says more about a patient than it should. Call or text (407) 694-2055, or request a quote.
Book a free consultation → Or call/text directly: (407) 694-2055Tell us a little about the business and we will come back with an honest read: what we would fix first, what it costs, and whether you need us at all. Prefer to see work before you talk numbers? Get a free homepage mockup, built for your business, yours to keep either way.
Brandon reads every one of these himself. You will hear back shortly with an honest read on what we would do first, what it costs, and whether it is worth it for you.