Optimize Your First Impression: A Comparison of the Aesthetic Websites of Private Practices and Academic Institutions

Goals/Purpose: A robust aesthetic surgery offering within academic programs has positive implications from both financial and educational standpoints. Most academic plastic surgery programs consider their aesthetic surgery practices to be revenue positive, and programs that have large financial contributions from aesthetic surgery practices are considered to have positive financial environments. In offering aesthetic surgery procedures, academic institutions find themselves in direct competition with private practice surgeons. In 2019, the amount of money spent nationwide on digital advertising surpassed that spent on traditional advertising. The practice’s website is frequently the first interaction between the patient and the practice, and patients often visit the website even after the clinic visit to learn more about the provider and the practice. To compete with private practices, academic institutions must view their website as integral to patient recruitment. This study examines the aesthetic surgery websites of academic and private practices to compare objective website characteristics.

Methods/Technique: Integrated plastic surgery programs with an aesthetic surgery website were matched with nearby private practices offering cosmetic surgery. Data was collected from websites, including information about procedures, media, surgeon characteristics, design, reputation, finances, and readability, and compared using chi-square and T-tests.

Results/Complications: The websites of 68 academic institutions (AP) and 68 location-matched private practices (PP) were examined. Fourteen (17.07%) programs did not have a website. Private practice websites provided information about a greater number of procedures (mean AP 21.82, PP 27.04, p=0.013), preparation for surgery (AP 52.94%, PP 83.82%, p<0.001), and expectations after surgery (AP 70.59%, PP 88.24%, p=0.01). Board certification was listed more frequently for private practices (AP 87%, PP 98%, p=0.01). Academic websites were more likely to discuss research (AP 76%, PP 57.35%, p=0.02). There was no significant difference in the readability of AP and PP websites (mean SMOG AP 7.70, PP 7.19, p=0.06).

Conclusion: Aesthetic surgery can be a beneficial component of academic plastic surgery programs, and a professional website is one of the most popular means for patients to learn about the practice. Currently, the websites of institutional aesthetic practices, when present, lack the amount of content present on private practice websites; including aspects which are most important to patients who utilize this method to learn about aesthetic plastic surgery practices. Academic institutions seeking to improve their aesthetic surgery practice should display a gallery of before and after photographs, clearly state the board certification of their surgeons, include more information about each surgery they offer, and consider offering information about financing and cost, testimonials, and reviews. In a field traditionally associated with high overhead costs, website modifications represent a cost-effective way for academic practices to increase their appeal in the cosmetic surgery market.