Anti-Marketing: Strategically Responding to Patient Reviews
In today’s digital world, negative online reviews are no longer a possibility for dental practices—they are an inevitability. Every patient complaint begins as a small flame.
As leaders in our practices, we do everything within our power to extinguish it before it turns into a wildfire—also known as a subpar star rating on a public platform. The reality is that we will never be 100% successful. Receiving a three-star review or below is simply part of doing business with the public.
The question becomes: How do we respond when it happens?
We can either internalize the criticism and allow it to discourage us, or we can approach it strategically. A subpar review can be used as a learning opportunity for practice growth, team training, or to reinforce the practice’s mission statement.
But what about reviews that may not be entirely truthful, or those that come from what many practices would consider a “wild card” patient? Not every patient is the right fit for your office—and that is okay. Negative reviews can still become valuable opportunities for communication, education, and even what I like to call an “anti-marketing campaign.”
Responding Within HIPAA Guidelines
Before responding to any review, it is critical to understand the boundaries created by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). When replying publicly, practices cannot confirm, deny, or correct personal information, medical history, treatment details, or anything that could identify the individual as a patient.
However, we can address the general topics mentioned in the review by framing our response around the practice’s office policies and ADA-influenced standard of care without referencing any patient-specific information. Discussing office policies or educating the public about dentistry does not violate HIPAA when done appropriately. This distinction allows practices to respond professionally while protecting patient privacy.
Below is an example of a generic response to a negative review:
“Thank you for your feedback. Patient privacy laws prevent us from discussing any personal health information in a public forum. Our office follows established clinical protocols and treatment recommendations designed to support long-term oral health. If you would like to discuss your experience, we encourage you to contact our office directly.”
There are times when a generic response may not be the best fit, depending on the concerns raised in the review. While a standard HIPAA-compliant statement is a safe starting point, some reviews reference specific topics such as office policies, clinical protocols, or the standard of care. In these situations, practices can respond by addressing the general subject matter while still maintaining patient privacy.
By focusing on policies and educational information rather than the individual situation, the practice can clarify expectations for prospective patients without violating HIPAA regulations.
A Response That Educates
Below is a real example of a review with the name omitted:
BUSINESS REVIEW — 1 STAR
“Greedy for the money. If you want a regular teeth cleaning, forget about it! They will insist that you do unnecessary exams. They won’t like to do just regular teeth cleaning.”
BUSINESS RESPONSE
“At <OFFICE NAME>, as with most dentists in the USA, it is standard of care to require patients to have an exam and x-rays to establish care, review medical history, and complete an oral diagnosis to serve the patient best. Dr. <NAME> does not practice dentistry below the standard of care.”
Rather than debating the reviewer, the response focuses on educating the public about the standard of care in dentistry. In some cases, reviewers may not understand the expectations of the American dental system. Dentistry cannot function as a “menu-style” service where patients order the procedure they want. Diagnosis must occur before treatment.
When practices clearly communicate their philosophy, they naturally attract patients who value that approach while discouraging those who do not. Sometimes the most valuable outcome of a negative review is not repairing the relationship with the reviewer—it is communicating clearly with future patients. I often refer to this strategy as an “anti-marketing campaign.”
The Power of Anti-Marketing
Traditional marketing is designed to attract patients to your practice. Anti-marketing, on the other hand, clarifies who may not be the right fit for your practice. When a reviewer criticizes a practice for failing to follow proper clinical protocols—such as requiring exams, radiographs, or comprehensive evaluations—the response becomes an opportunity to reinforce the practice’s standards publicly.
In doing so, the practice sends two messages simultaneously. First, it reassures prospective patients who value thorough, ethical care that the office follows recognized standards of dentistry. Second, it signals to individuals who prefer a “quick cleaning only” or menu-style approach to dentistry that the practice may not align with their expectations.
This is where anti-marketing becomes powerful. A thoughtful response to a negative review serves a broader purpose. It becomes less about defending the practice and more about defining the practice. Prospective patients reading the exchange will often recognize the difference between a complaint based on misunderstanding and a practice that is committed to ethical dentistry.
In that sense, the review itself becomes part of the practice’s messaging. While we should always aim to resolve concerns privately before they escalate to online reviews, some situations cannot be prevented. When they do occur, leaders can choose to view them not as damage to their reputations but as opportunities to reinforce their values.
Leading Through Criticism
Ultimately, responding to reviews is not just about reputation management—it is about leadership. As practice leaders, we set the tone for how our teams handle criticism, communicate standards, and protect the integrity of the practice and patient care.
Not every review will be fair, and not every patient will align with your practice philosophy. But every response is an opportunity to reinforce who you are as a practice.
When handled thoughtfully, even a one-star review can become a powerful statement about your values, your standards, and the type of dentistry you are committed to providing. In the end, the goal is not to win an argument online—it is to lead with professionalism, protect patient trust, and ensure that the right patients find their way to your practice.
About the Author
Malissa Gianfala-Garza, MAADOM
Malissa grew up in a small town in Louisiana before relocating to Georgia in 2005 after Hurricane Katrina. She began her dental career in 2010 as a Surgical Dental Assistant and, eight years later, expanded her path into business management.
With 15 years of dental experience, formal education from LSU and GSU, countless continuing education hours, and dedication to the AADOM Designation program, Malissa is passionate about leadership and helping others turn their professional goals into reality. Her greatest achievement is being a mother to her four beautiful children, who inspire her every day and shape the person she is today.
