Websites for med spas and aesthetic clinics
The before and after gallery is the thing that sells and the thing most likely to attract a complaint. Built so it can do the first without inviting the second.
Best for medical spas, aesthetic clinics and injectors whose marketing leans on results photography and whose treatments are physician supervised.
A med spa website is a gallery with a booking button attached. The photography is what persuades, which is why it is also the part under the most scrutiny: before and after images sit at the intersection of federal advertising rules, state medical board rules and patient privacy, and they generate more enforcement attention than anything else on the page.
What the results gallery has to do
The federal rule is about typicality. Results shown in advertising are expected to represent what a typical patient can expect, which means a gallery built from the best six outcomes of three hundred is a problem however real each photograph is. A line saying results vary does not resolve it, because the question the rule asks is what results are typical, not whether the reader was warned.
Three practical consequences for the build. Each case needs the treatment named, the number of sessions and the time elapsed, because without those the image is not evidence of anything. The photography conditions have to match between the two shots, since changed lighting or angle is the most common reason an honest result looks edited. And the gallery needs enough cases to be representative rather than a highlight reel.
Consent for treatment is not consent for marketing
A patient agreeing to a procedure has not agreed to appear on a website, in an advert or on a social account. Marketing use needs its own written authorisation, and it should be revocable, which has a build consequence people forget: you need to be able to remove one patient's images from every page they appear on quickly. A gallery hard-coded across six service pages makes that a developer ticket. A gallery driven by a content collection makes it a two-minute edit.
State rules sit on top, and they vary
Medical boards regulate how a practice may advertise, who may be called a doctor, which credentials have to be shown beside a provider's name, and in several states whether a specific outcome may be promised at all. This is not something to resolve from an article, including this one. It is a question for the practice's medical director and its own counsel, and the build has to leave room for the answer: a credential line that can carry what the state wants, and a disclaimer component that can be placed per page rather than buried in a footer.
Price is the objection, and silence does not remove it
Aesthetic buyers are comparing, and in this vertical they are usually comparing a treatment they have already decided to have. A site that will not indicate price pushes that comparison to whoever will, often a directory. A starting price with what changes it is more honest than a quote form, converts better, and filters out the enquiries the clinic was never going to take anyway.
What a build here actually includes
Every build is scoped to the practice, but on this kind of site these are the parts that are not optional.
- A results gallery driven by a content collection, so a withdrawn authorisation is an edit rather than a deployment
- Case fields for treatment, session count and time elapsed, present on every entry
- A disclaimer component placed per page and per claim rather than only in the footer
- Provider profiles with the credential line the state expects beside the name
- Indicative pricing with the factors that move it
- Booking or enquiry that reaches a human quickly, since this is a considered purchase with a short decision window
What we keep seeing go wrong
None of these are hypothetical. They are the things that turn up again and again on sites in this vertical, and most of them are cheap to avoid and expensive to undo.
- A gallery of the six best outcomes with a results vary line under it
- Photos used on the strength of treatment consent, with no separate marketing authorisation
- Hard-coded images across several pages, which makes a withdrawal expensive
- Guaranteeing an outcome, which several state boards treat as unprofessional conduct regardless of what the federal rules say
- Hiding price entirely and sending the comparison to a directory
- Stock photography of models mixed into a results gallery, which is the fastest way to lose the credibility the gallery existed to build
Questions we get asked first
- Do we need a disclaimer on before and after photos?
- You need more than a disclaimer. The expectation is that what you show represents a typical result, with the treatment, the number of sessions and the elapsed time stated. A disclaimer supports that; it does not replace it.
- Can we use photos of patients who signed a treatment consent?
- No. Marketing use needs its own written authorisation, separate from treatment consent, and the patient should be able to withdraw it. Build the gallery so that withdrawal is quick to action.
- Should we publish prices?
- In this vertical, usually yes. Buyers are comparing a treatment they have already chosen, and a site with no price loses that comparison to one that has it. A starting price with the factors that change it keeps the conversation honest.
- Who decides what our site is allowed to claim?
- Your medical director and your own counsel, against your state's board rules. We build the page so the answer has somewhere to live: a per-page disclaimer, a credential line, and copy that avoids promising outcomes.
- Can a med spa site run on Webflow?
- Yes for the marketing site. Anything collecting health detail goes through an embedded form from a vendor that signs a business associate agreement, for the same reason it does on a dental or therapy site.
