Website Claims: 'Board-Certified Specialists' and a Lifetime Guarantee
A three-dentist general practice in Metairie is relaunching its website and social media. The homepage reads "Board-Certified Implant and Cosmetic Specialists" and "Lifetime Guarantee on All Crowns and Implants." One dentist completed a three-day implant continuum and holds no specialty certificate; none of the three is board-certified in any ADA-recognized specialty. The site displays 12 before-and-after photo pairs, 4 purchased from a stock library and 2 of a patient who signed a general treatment consent but no photo release. A testimonial reads "Dr. L cured my TMJ, I will never have headaches again." The practice also advertises a "$99 new patient special, exam, X-rays, and cleaning," with fine print stating the cleaning may be upgraded to deep cleaning at additional cost. The office manager asks whether the wording can stay until the site is rebuilt in six weeks.
1. Which elements of the website violate Louisiana advertising rules, and why?
Read the worked answer
'Board-Certified ... Specialists.' Louisiana permits truthful advertising but prohibits statements that are false, misleading, or likely to deceive. Two separate defects: none of the three dentists holds a board certificate from an ADA-recognized certifying board, so "board-certified" is false; and "specialists" implies recognized specialty status, while implant and cosmetic dentistry are not ADA-recognized specialties. A three-day continuum does not create specialty status.
'Lifetime Guarantee.' A guarantee of clinical outcome is misleading because results depend on patient factors the practice cannot control, and it creates a contract claim separate from any malpractice claim. Remove it.
The $99 special. Advertising a price for a service most patients will not receive, with the real cost buried in fine print, is deceptive. Either advertise the service actually rendered or state plainly what the $99 covers and what triggers the additional fee.
General principle. The test is not whether a statement is literally true in some strained sense, but whether a reasonable patient would be misled. Each of these fails that test.
2. Analyze the photograph and testimonial issues, including consent.
Read the worked answer
Stock photos. Presenting purchased images as the practice's own patients is an affirmative misrepresentation, and it is the most serious item on the page because it is not merely an exaggeration but a fabricated result. Remove them.
Actual patient photos. Using real patient images requires a written, specific photo authorization separate from the general treatment consent, covering the medium used, the duration, and the right to withdraw. The Board's records and consent expectations apply, and HIPAA authorization is a separate requirement. Images may not be altered to exaggerate results.
Testimonial. "Cured my TMJ, I will never have headaches again" is a cure claim. Even a genuine patient statement cannot be used where it promises a result the practice cannot guarantee. The practice is responsible for content it publishes, whether or not the patient wrote it.
Records. Keep signed releases and an archived copy of the exact image and text published, with dates. If a complaint arrives, the practice must be able to prove what was authorized and when the material came down.
3. What corrective steps are required before launch, and what exposure does the practice face?
Read the worked answer
Before launch. Unpublish the offending pages now, not in six weeks. Send written notice to the web vendor, have the three dentists review the revised copy, and have counsel review it before republication. Replace "board-certified specialists" with accurate descriptions such as "general dentists providing implant restorations," delete the guarantee, remove the stock photos, obtain signed releases or remove the real-patient images, and rewrite the testimonial to avoid any cure claim.
Exposure. Misleading advertising and deceptive patient images fall within unprofessional conduct and can be prosecuted by the Board regardless of whether any patient was harmed; sanctions range from reprimand and fine to suspension. Separately, a patient who relied on a false lifetime guarantee or on another person's photographs may sue for fraud or breach of contract.
Why documentation matters. Advertising violations are unusually easy for the Board to prove because the evidence is public and dated. The practice's best mitigation is a documented, prompt correction and a compliance review, not an argument that the vendor wrote the copy.