Before-and-After Photos for Dental Practices: What's Actually Allowed

13 September 2026·5 min read

Quick answer: Before-and-after photos are one of the most heavily scrutinised types of content a dental practice can post, because AHPRA and the Dental Board of Australia's advertising guidelines specifically address testimonials and outcome-implying imagery for regulated health services. This post covers the practical groundwork — informed, specific consent and internal review — but it isn't a legal ruling on what's currently allowed, and the guidelines change, so check the current AHPRA and Dental Board guidance yourself before publishing anything. 🤍

A dramatic before-and-after photo is one of the best-performing pieces of content a cosmetic-leaning dental practice can post — which is exactly the problem. High engagement and high compliance risk travel together here, because before-and-after imagery for a regulated health service sits right in the middle of AHPRA's advertising guidelines around testimonials and result-implying content. Posting first and checking later is how practices end up explaining themselves to the Dental Board instead of enjoying the engagement.

This isn't a post that tells you exactly what you can and can't post — nobody should give you that with total confidence, because the guidelines are specific, they get updated, and the right call depends on how an image and caption are used. What follows is the practical groundwork most practices skip, plus a clear instruction to check the current official guidance before relying on anything else. 💖

What most dental practices get wrong

The most common mistake isn't malicious — it's assuming a patient saying "yeah, go for it" in the chair counts as consent to publish. It doesn't, not in any form a practice would want to rely on if questioned. Verbal, in-the-moment agreement isn't the same as informed, specific, written consent for a particular image, on particular platforms, for a set time.

The second mistake is reusing consent. A patient who agreed to a photo on the website three years ago didn't necessarily agree to a paid Instagram ad this year — different platform, different audience, different use. In multi-practitioner practices this gets worse: one dentist gets a vague nod, someone else later finds the photo in a shared folder and posts it, with nobody sure what was actually agreed.

Before you publish any before-and-after photo, work through this checklist:

Do you have written, informed consent from the patient specifically for this use — not a verbal agreement, and not consent given for a different purpose?
Does the consent specify which platforms (website, Instagram and a paid ad are all different) and for how long, and does the patient know they can withdraw it?
Have you removed or confirmed any identifying details beyond what the patient specifically agreed to share?
Does the image or caption imply a guaranteed outcome, a typical result or a specific timeframe? If so, rework it — this is a common flashpoint in advertising guidance for health services.
Has someone at the practice checked the current AHPRA and Dental Board of Australia advertising guidelines on testimonials and before-and-after imagery against this specific post, rather than relying on what was allowed last time or what a competitor is doing?
Is there a dated record on file of exactly what was consented to, in case the patient, a colleague or a regulator asks later?

The Invisalign-heavy practice: Imagine a clinic posting a clear-aligner journey as a slow reveal over several posts. Each post is a fresh use of the same image, so it needs its own confirmed consent and caption review — especially the "after" post, where "amazing results in just 6 months" needs checking against whether it reads as a typical or guaranteed outcome.

The general practice with one dramatic case: A practice has a striking set from a complex case treated four years ago, consented to for the website only. Posting it to TikTok for a trend needs fresh, platform-specific consent — old website consent doesn't stretch to a new platform and audience.

The multi-practitioner group practice: A practice manager finds a compelling before-and-after in a shared drive for a paid ad campaign. Without a centralised consent register showing what that patient agreed to and when, the safest move is treating it as not cleared until the treating dentist confirms the original consent's scope.

How to build this properly

Create a marketing-specific consent form, separate from clinical photography consent, spelling out platform, duration and the right to withdraw. Keep a dated register of who consented to what, stored with the patient record. Nominate one person, often the practice manager or principal dentist, as the final compliance check before anything goes live, and review consent periodically rather than assuming it still applies years later.

💡 The safest before-and-after strategy is sometimes no before-and-after at all. A practice can build plenty of trust through process content, patient education and general smile galleries that don't carry the same consent and compliance overhead — it's worth genuinely weighing whether the engagement is worth the ongoing admin and risk before making it a content pillar.

Treating a verbal "that's fine" in the chair as documented consent
Assuming old consent for one platform or campaign automatically covers a new one
Writing captions that imply a guaranteed, typical or fast result
Relying on "everyone else in the industry does it this way" instead of checking current guidance
No centralised record of who consented to what, especially in multi-practitioner practices
Publishing first and planning to take it down "if anyone complains" instead of clearing it beforehand

Please note: general information, not legal advice — check current official AHPRA and Dental Board of Australia guidance before relying on it.

Frequently asked questions

Is it illegal for a dental practice to post before-and-after photos?

There's no simple yes-or-no answer, and anyone confidently giving you one without knowing your situation isn't being careful. AHPRA and the Dental Board's guidelines specifically address testimonials and outcome-implying content, and how they apply depends on the image, caption, platform and consent involved — check current official guidance, and consider specific advice for your situation.

If we have written consent, does that make the post compliant?

Consent is necessary but not the whole picture. A compliant post also needs to avoid implying a guaranteed, typical or fast outcome, sitting within current advertising guidelines on testimonial-style content independently of consent.

Can we just blur the patient's face instead of getting consent?

Removing identifying features can reduce some risk, but doesn't automatically remove the need for consent or resolve the outcome-claim issue, especially if the patient could still recognise themselves or be recognised by others. It's not a reliable shortcut.

What can we post instead if we decide the risk isn't worth it?

Plenty of practices build strong content around patient education, the team and general process — what a first visit looks like, how a technology works in general terms — without touching identifiable clinical outcome imagery, a lower-risk way to stay active.

Keep reading 🤍

Written by

Kate, founder of Chronically Online

I help Gold Coast and Brisbane businesses grow with branding, websites and marketing that actually works.

Work with me ✦