How to respond to dental reviews, positive and negative, without breaching the guidelines

By Carolyn S Dean, Founder and CEO, Trilbii AI

Reply publicly, briefly and politely, without confirming the reviewer is a patient or mentioning anything about their care, then invite them to continue the conversation privately. Do not offer anything in exchange for changing or removing the review. Report it to Google only if it breaks Google’s content policies, and keep any promotional claims out of the reply.

A negative review lands on the practice manager’s desk far more often than on the dentist’s, and it usually arrives on a busy day. The instinct is to explain what really happened. In a health practice that instinct runs straight into privacy law, the professional Code of conduct and the advertising rules, which is why a good reply is shorter than most people expect. This guide sits within our wider guide to dental marketing with AI, and it covers what to write, what to leave out and when Google will step in.

Book a personalised demo

Why can’t the practice just explain its side?

Because explaining its side almost always means disclosing health information. Under the Privacy Act, health information includes information about a health service provided to a person, along with appointment and billing details and dental records, and it is treated as sensitive information with stricter rules (OAIC, Guide to health privacy: key concepts). A reply that says “we checked your file and you missed two appointments” or “the crown was fitted correctly” discloses exactly that.

Even confirming that the reviewer attended the practice tells the public they received a health service there. The reviewer chose to share their own experience; the practice has not been given consent to add to it. Australian Privacy Principle 6 limits using or disclosing personal information for a purpose other than the one it was collected for, and replying to a review is not the purpose a patient had in mind when they filled in their medical history (APP guidelines, chapter 6).

Has anyone actually been caught out by a review reply?

Yes, although not a dental practice. In 2024 the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner found that a real estate agency interfered with a tenant’s privacy when it replied to his negative Google review with his full name, occupation and financial circumstances, and ordered a written apology (OAIC, Exercise caution when responding to negative reviews). The agency accepted it could have addressed the review without identifying him.

The OAIC’s takeaway applies with more force to a health practice, because the information a practice holds is more sensitive than a rental ledger. Its blog puts it plainly: “it isn’t right to expose someone’s personal information to pressure them into modifying or deleting an adverse online review.”

What do the Code of conduct and Ahpra’s social media guidance say?

Both point the same way: protect the patient’s privacy and resolve grievances privately. The shared Code of conduct, which the Dental Board of Australia applies to dental practitioners, says in section 3.3 that practitioners should not post any person’s information or images, even when the person is not directly named, without written and informed consent (Shared Code of conduct).

Section 4.6 of the same code deals with complaints. Good practice includes acknowledging the patient’s right to raise concerns, working with them to resolve the issue locally where possible, and making sure the complaint does not affect their care. Ahpra’s social media guidance adds that grievances with patients are best resolved privately, and reminds practitioners that the sum of several small details online can be enough to identify someone.

What should a reply to a negative review include?

A reply works best with four parts and nothing else:

Thanks for the feedback. It shows every future reader that the practice takes criticism seriously.
Acknowledgement without detail. “We’re sorry to read this” acknowledges the experience without confirming a visit, a treatment or a date.
A private next step. A named role, such as the practice manager, and a phone number or email address.
A neutral close. No sign off from a named dentist if that would confirm who saw the person.

Leave out anything the reader could not have learned from the review itself. That means no dates, no treatment names, no mention of fees owed, no clinical explanation and no suggestion that the reviewer is mistaken about what happened. If the reviewer has included their own health details, do not repeat them.

Google tells the reviewer when the practice replies, and reviewers can edit their review afterwards (Google Business Profile Help, Manage customer reviews). A calm reply with a real phone number gives them a reason to call, and the conversation that follows is where the problem can actually be fixed.

What do good replies look like?

Here are three short examples in a practice’s voice. Replace the bracketed details with your own.

A review about waiting time

Thank you for letting us know. Running on time matters to us, and we’re sorry to read about this experience. We’d welcome the chance to talk it through, so please call [e.g. Sarah, our practice manager] on [e.g. 02 9000 0000].

A review about fees

Thank you for your feedback. We aim to explain fees clearly before any treatment begins, and we would like to hear more about what happened. Please contact [e.g. our practice manager] on [e.g. 02 9000 0000] or at [e.g. [email protected]] so we can look into it with you.

A review about clinical care

Thank you for taking the time to write this. We can’t discuss anyone’s care in a public forum, so we’d ask you to call [e.g. our practice manager] directly on [e.g. 02 9000 0000]. We’d like to listen properly and work out the next steps with you.

Each reply would read the same whether or not the reviewer had ever been a patient. That is the test worth applying to every draft.

How do you take the conversation offline?

Make the private channel real and make sure someone answers it. If the person calls, the practice can then check its records, hear the full story and respond with the detail the public reply left out. The Code of conduct also expects practitioners to give patients information about the complaints system, which can include the relevant health complaints commissioner or Ahpra (Shared Code of conduct, section 4.6).

Once the matter is resolved, it is fine to let the reviewer decide whether to update their review. Asking them whether they would consider it is generally reasonable. Making the resolution conditional on it is where the trouble starts.

Can the practice offer something in return for removing the review?

No. Google’s policy for Maps content says merchants must not offer incentives, such as payment, discounts, free goods or services, in exchange for posting a review or for revising or removing a negative one, and content posted after such an offer is removed (Google Maps user contributed content policy). The ACCC adds that removing or suppressing a genuine negative review may mislead consumers under the Australian Consumer Law (ACCC, Online reviews for products and services).

A refund or a free follow up appointment can still be the right outcome of a complaint. It simply needs to stand on its own, offered because it resolves the complaint, with no link to what happens to the review.

When can a review be reported to Google?

Only when it breaks one of Google’s content policies. Google says any review can be reported, but only those that violate its policies are eligible for removal, and it asks businesses not to report a review simply because they disagree with it (Report inappropriate reviews on your Business Profile).

The categories most relevant to a dental practice are:

reviews that are fake or not based on a real experience, including reviews posted by a competitor
reviews posted from several accounts by the same person
reviews based on a conflict of interest, such as a former employee reviewing their old workplace
harassment, hate speech, obscene or profane content, or personal information about a team member posted without consent
off topic content, such as general commentary or a rant that is not about an experience at the practice

Reports are made from the Business Profile or Google’s Reviews Management Tool, which also shows the status of each report and allows a one time appeal. Evaluation usually takes several days. It is still worth posting a brief reply while you wait, because readers see the review in the meantime.

How should a practice reply to a positive review?

A short, general thank you is usually the right reply. It shows future readers the practice values feedback, and it carries little risk when it follows the same privacy test as a reply to a negative review: nothing that confirms the person is a patient, and nothing about a treatment, a practitioner’s skill or a result.

Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback. We’ll pass your kind words on to the team.

Two cautions apply. First, Ahpra’s advertising FAQ explains that engaging with a review on a third party site may be treated as using a testimonial to advertise, particularly where the reply discusses clinical aspects of care, so a reply that adds “we’re so glad your implant turned out well” or invites the reader to book the same treatment changes the picture. Second, copying a positive review onto the practice’s website or social pages moves it into the practice’s own advertising, where it must pass Ahpra’s testimonial test. Our guide on whether a dentist can use Google reviews in advertising explains that test.

Can a reply to a review count as advertising?

It can, which is why the reply should stay factual and free of promotion. Ahpra’s Guidelines for advertising a regulated health service say in section 4.3.3 that practitioners should take care when engaging with reviews on a third party site, because engaging may be considered using a testimonial to advertise a regulated health service. Ahpra’s testimonial guidance repeats the point.

With a negative review the risk usually shows up in a different way. A reply that defends the practice with lines such as “hundreds of our patients love their results” or “our treatments are pain free” promotes the service, and claims like those can create an unreasonable expectation of benefit under section 4.4 of the guidelines. The safer reply describes the next step and leaves the practice’s strengths for the practice’s own marketing, where they can be checked properly. Our guide to the AHPRA advertising rules for dental practices covers the wider picture.

Who should reply, and how quickly?

One named person should own review replies, and a second person should read any reply to a negative review before it goes up. A reply within a couple of business days is a sensible target. It shows readers the practice pays attention, and it is quick enough to reach the reviewer while they are still willing to talk. Reviews that mention a clinical outcome, a complaint to a regulator or a legal threat are worth showing to the practice owner before anything is posted.

In Trilbii: the Google Review Responder drafts replies in the practice’s own voice, including the difficult ones, and screens the wording against its AHPRA advertising framework so anything that may need attention is flagged for the team to review before it is posted. If you would like to see how that works alongside the rest of AI for dental practices, book a personalised demo.

Founding practice offer: for the first 20 practices, Trilbii is $497 per month + GST for as long as you remain continuously subscribed, with the onboarding fee waived and no lock in contract.

Frequently asked questions

Generally yes, with a short, polite reply that invites the person to make contact privately. Future patients read the replies as much as the reviews. The exception is a review that clearly breaks Google’s policies, where reporting it is the first step, although a brief reply is still reasonable while the report is assessed.

It is better not to. Stating whether someone is or is not a patient discloses information about who the practice treats. If you believe the review is fake, report it to Google under its fake engagement policy and keep the public reply neutral, for example by inviting the reviewer to call so the practice can look into it.

Asking whether they would consider updating it is generally reasonable. Offering a refund, discount or free treatment in exchange for changing or removing it is not allowed under Google’s policy and risks breaching the Australian Consumer Law.

Report it to Google if it breaks a content policy and seek legal advice before taking any other step. Keep the public reply calm and free of personal or clinical detail, because anything the practice posts can be read alongside the review for as long as it stays up.

Yes, provided no patient information goes into the tool and a person who knows the practice reads every reply before it is posted. The reviewer’s public words are enough to draft a good reply, and the practice stays responsible for what appears under its name.