Yes. Asking every patient for a Google review is lawful, and it is one of the few growth levers a regulated clinic has that carries almost no advertising risk. What is prohibited is a testimonial about clinical care used in your advertising, and gating the ask so only happy patients are invited.
Those are two different things, and conflating them is why so many good clinics sit on a handful of ageing reviews.
The rule, precisely
Section 133 of the National Law prohibits using testimonials about clinical care in advertising a regulated health service. The key words are testimonial and advertising.
- A patient writing on your Google Business Profile about how they were treated is a review, and it is fine.
- You lifting that review onto your homepage as a quote about their treatment result is a testimonial in your advertising, and it is not.
AHPRA has been consistent that practitioners are not responsible for unsolicited reviews on platforms they do not control, and are not required to remove them. You are responsible for what you publish.
What patients may write about
You cannot control this, and you should not try to. But you can shape the ask, and the wording of your request matters.
Safe territory - experience: how they were greeted, whether they felt listened to, how the room felt, whether things were explained, whether they felt rushed, whether they would return.
Risky territory - clinical outcome: what treatment they had, what result it produced, naming a product.
A review that names a prescription medicine is a problem the moment you republish it. Left on Google, it is the patient's speech. Pulled into your ads, it is yours.
The gating rule that catches good clinics
You must ask everyone, on the same terms. What is not permitted is a system that screens first - the flow where a patient rates you privately, and only the fours and fives are routed to Google while the ones and twos land in an internal inbox.
That pattern is common in generic review software and it fails twice. It breaches the even-handedness expectation, and Google's own policies prohibit review gating outright. A clinic can lose its ability to collect reviews at all.
The same ask, to everyone, every time. That single rule keeps you clear of both the regulator and Google, and it produces a more believable review profile. A perfect five-star wall reads as bought. A 4.8 with a couple of thoughtful mixed reviews reads as real.
Why clinics stall
Almost never because the care is poor. Usually because:
- Nobody asks. The intention exists, the moment passes, the patient leaves.
- The ask happens at the wrong moment - at the desk while they are paying, when they are distracted and about to leave.
- The ask is hard to act on. "Look us up on Google" is friction. A link that opens the review box is not.
- It is one person's job, and that person is busy treating patients.
The fix is systematic rather than motivational. An automatic message a few hours after the appointment, once the visit has settled but before the day has gone, with a single link. Same message to everyone. No screening step.
What to do about replies
Reply to everything, and write the reply for the next reader rather than the one who left it. A prospective patient reads the replies to judge the clinic, and a calm, warm, brief reply to a critical review does more for your credibility than ten five-star ratings.
One constraint that catches people: do not confirm in a public reply that the person was a patient, and do not discuss any clinical or personal detail. Thank them, acknowledge the experience in general terms, and offer to continue privately. Confirming attendance is a privacy problem even when the review already implies it.
There is a second constraint that is less well known, and it comes from AHPRA directly. While practitioners are not responsible for removing reviews on platforms they do not control, AHPRA warns that a provider "should take care if they choose to engage with reviews on a third-party site as this may be considered using a testimonial to advertise a regulated health service". In other words, the act of replying can pull an otherwise-independent review into your advertising.
That is not a reason to stay silent, but it does shape the reply. Keep it about service and courtesy. A reply that thanks someone for their patience and invites them to call is safe. A reply that says "so glad the treatment worked for you" has adopted a clinical claim and made it yours.
Reviews and AI search
There is a newer reason to care. Assistants like ChatGPT increasingly answer "who is good in this area" by reading what is publicly written about a business. Review volume, recency and the substance of the replies are all readable signals. A clinic with sixty recent, specific reviews and thoughtful replies is far more likely to be surfaced than one with eight reviews from 2023.
Common questions
Can an aesthetic clinic ask patients for Google reviews?
Yes. Asking is lawful and encouraged. What is prohibited is using testimonials about clinical care in your own advertising, and gating the ask so that only satisfied patients are invited to review.
Are Google reviews banned for clinics under AHPRA rules?
No. Section 133 restricts testimonials in advertising you control. Reviews left by patients on a platform you do not control are not your advertising, and AHPRA does not require you to remove them.
Can I put a patient review on my website?
Not if it describes clinical care or an outcome for a regulated health service. Republishing it makes it a testimonial in your advertising. Reviews about the experience of visiting are safer, but the safest position on a Tier 1 site is not to carry a testimonial wall at all.
Is it OK to only ask happy patients?
No. That is review gating. It breaches the even-handedness expectation and Google's own policies prohibit it, which can cost a clinic the ability to collect reviews at all.
Can I offer a discount for leaving a review?
No. Incentivising reviews compromises their honesty, breaches Google's policies and creates an Australian Consumer Law problem around misleading conduct.
Is replying to a review risky under the AHPRA rules?
Replying is allowed, but AHPRA warns that engaging with reviews on a third-party site may be considered using a testimonial to advertise a regulated health service. Keep replies about service and courtesy. Thanking someone for their patience is safe; saying you are glad the treatment worked adopts a clinical claim and makes it yours.
Should I reply to negative reviews?
Yes, briefly and warmly, written for the next reader. Do not confirm the person was a patient and do not discuss clinical or personal detail. Offer to continue the conversation privately.
This is guidance, not legal advice. It reflects the Therapeutic Goods Act, the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law and the AHPRA advertising guidelines as they stand in September 2026, and the way we apply them across the clinics we run marketing for. Rules change and individual circumstances differ. Where a decision carries real risk to a registration, take your own advice.