Should a dermatology clinic separate its cosmetic and medical pages?
Short answer
Separate pages, and the reason is regulatory before it is commercial. Australia's cosmetic advertising guidelines put obligations on a cosmetic page that a medical dermatology page never carries: no testimonials, prominent risk information, and strict conditions on before-and-after images. Put both halves on one page and the whole page inherits the stricter set.
Key points
AHPRA's cosmetic advertising guidelines state that advertising of higher risk cosmetic procedures must not use testimonials, and that reach extends to re-sharing patient stories, liking reviews and linking to third-party testimonials.
The same guidelines prohibit images of people under 18 years of age, and prohibit airbrushed, soft-filter or modified images.
Words such as gentle, simple, safe, quick or easy cannot be used about a higher risk cosmetic procedure without detailed risk information alongside them.
Before-and-after images must be genuine and unedited, matched for lighting, angle, clothing and makeup, with the before image most prominent and a warning that outcomes shown are only relevant for that patient.
Where a specific practitioner is advertised, registration details including the registration number and division must be included.
In the United Kingdom a prescription-only medicine cannot be advertised to the public, and indirect references count, so the cosmetic half of a UK site cannot name the treatment at all.
Medical dermatology in Australia is usually reached by GP referral, valid for 12 months from the date the specialist first sees the patient. Cosmetic work is self-referred.
Why do the two halves need different pages at all?
A dermatology clinic runs two businesses that happen to share a waiting room. The medical half sees patients sent by a GP, often on a referral valid for 12 months from the first appointment, for a mole check, a suspicious lesion, eczema or psoriasis. The cosmetic half sees people who referred themselves, are comparing three clinics, and are paying out of pocket.
Those two people arrive on the site with different questions. The referred patient wants to know you are the specialist named on the letter, what the appointment involves and how soon you can see them. The self-referred patient wants to know what you charge, what the result looks like, and why you rather than the clinic down the road.
One page cannot answer both without becoming a list. That much is ordinary marketing. What makes dermatology different is that the two halves are also governed differently, and that is the part that decides the architecture.
What does a cosmetic page have to carry that a medical page does not?
In Australia, advertising a higher risk non-surgical cosmetic procedure brings a set of obligations that a page about skin cancer checks never triggers. The guidelines are specific rather than general.
No testimonials. The guidelines state that advertising of higher risk cosmetic procedures must not use testimonials, and that this reaches re-sharing patient stories, liking reviews and linking to third-party testimonials.
No images of people under 18 years of age.
No airbrushed, soft-filter or modified images, and no images of models or celebrities without evidence they actually had the procedure.
No gentle, simple, safe, quick or easy, unless detailed risk information sits alongside the claim.
Risk information must be prominent and easily accessible rather than buried in fine print.
If you name a practitioner, you include their registration details, including registration number and division.
What happens when both sit on one page?
The page inherits the stricter set. A single services page covering mole checks and anti-wrinkle work is, in the part that mentions the cosmetic procedure, cosmetic advertising. The risk information has to be on that page. The testimonial you were happy to run for the medical side now sits on a page that also advertises a higher risk cosmetic procedure.
That is the failure mode we see most often, and it is not usually a decision anyone made. It is a services page written once, three years ago, that gradually collected everything the clinic offers. Nobody re-read it when the cosmetic list grew.
Splitting the pages is the cheapest fix because it puts a boundary around the obligations. The cosmetic pages carry the risk information, the warnings and the constrained language. The medical pages are free to be written normally, under the ordinary health advertising rules that apply to any practice.
What can the cosmetic page say in the UK and New Zealand?
Less than most clinics assume, and the constraint changes the page rather than just the wording. In the United Kingdom a prescription-only medicine cannot be advertised to the public, and indirect references count, so a services list cannot carry the brand name or a euphemism for it. In New Zealand the rewritten code prohibits patient testimonials in direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines.
We have written that out in full in what a clinic can and cannot say about Botox, including what a UK clinic may put on the page instead. The architectural point here is narrower: if you operate in more than one of these markets from one site, the page has to be written to the strictest one, or the markets need separate pages.
How should the two page sets be structured?
The shape that works is two branches from the services level, not one list with subheadings.
A medical branch with a page per condition or service: skin cancer checks, mole mapping, eczema, psoriasis, acne. Condition-led, because that is what a referred patient searches for.
A cosmetic branch with a page per outcome, carrying the risk information and the constrained language, and in the UK not naming the treatment.
One page per item on each branch. A page that covers four conditions ranks for none of them properly and satisfies nobody who lands on it.
Separate contact paths if the booking differs. A referral upload is not the same form as a consultation enquiry.
A clear statement on each cosmetic page of who performs the procedure and their registration, since Australia requires it when a practitioner is named.
Which page should the Google Business Profile point at?
The clinic's page, not the cosmetic branch, unless the cosmetic arm is a genuinely separate business with its own premises and staff. Google's guidelines require a profile to link to a website that represents that individual business location, and for a single clinic doing both, that is the clinic page.
If the cosmetic arm does operate separately, the question becomes the one we covered in whether a group should run one website or several. The same rules apply, and the same answer usually holds: one domain, distinct pages, unless the second brand genuinely stands on its own.
How do the two page types compare?
Medical dermatology page
Cosmetic page
Who arrives
Referred by a GP, often on a 12-month referral
Self-referred, comparing providers
What they searched
The condition or the check
The outcome, and in the UK not the treatment name
Testimonials
Restricted under general health advertising rules
Prohibited outright for higher risk procedures in Australia
Before-and-after images
Rarely relevant
Only under strict conditions, with a patient-specific warning
Risk information
Ordinary duty of accuracy
Must be prominent, not in fine print
Naming a practitioner
Optional
Registration number and division required
Language to avoid
Unsubstantiated superlatives
Also gentle, simple, safe, quick and easy without risk detail
Related questions
Can we keep one services page that lists both?
You can, but the page becomes cosmetic advertising in the part that names the cosmetic procedure, so the risk information and the restrictions apply to the whole page. Most clinics find it cheaper to split than to write one page that satisfies the stricter rules throughout.
Does this mean we need two websites?
No. Two branches on one site is the normal answer. A separate domain only makes sense if the cosmetic arm is a genuinely separate business with its own premises, staff and brand, which is the same test that applies to any multi-site question.
Can we use before-and-after images at all?
In Australia, yes, under conditions. Both images must be genuine photos of actual patients, matched for lighting, angle, clothing and makeup, unedited, with the before image most prominent and a warning that outcomes shown are only relevant for that patient. The timing of the after photo should be stated.
Which Google Business Profile category should a clinic doing both use?
The one that describes the main business, not the one you most want to rank for. A clinic whose income is mostly medical dermatology with a cosmetic arm is a dermatologist, and the cosmetic services belong in the services list rather than the primary category.
Do the UK rules matter if we only treat patients in Australia?
Not directly, but they matter the moment one website serves both markets. A page written for an Australian audience that names a prescription-only medicine is still reachable from the UK. Clinics working across markets either write to the strictest rule or build separate pages per market.