SEO case studies in ophthalmology

These practices found themselves in a bind over SEO-related abuses and poor results.

By Michael Dobkowski

This is the second of a two-part series on search engine optimization. Last month, I discussed how SEO logistics have evolved and I gave advice on how your website could reach as many potential patients as possible — if you heed the advice. Here, in part two, I present three case studies: two practices that took the advice and benefited, and one that didn’t, and rues the day.

CASE STUDY 1:

From penalty box to clear winner

It is always hard to come into a situation in which an ophthalmology website has been penalized by Google. The reason: While the practice wants the issue resolved, it’s not easy to fix once the problem becomes established. If an SEO company tells you differently, it clearly has not enough experience in this area.

The story starts out with a frustrated physician in a high-profile market whose website could not achieve a first page search result, even after hiring several different companies. After the physician described to us what the symptoms were, we did some research and determined that there was a high probability of an “anchor text abuse penalty.” Another experienced SEO company in the ophthalmic area agreed.

Google penalties come in various forms, some of which are easy to fix and others that are not easy to fix or identify. The risk of trying to fix a damaged domain is the time and money spent for only a marginal result. It was determined in this case that there was an anchor text abuse penalty because the former SEO company had blasted many links with the same anchor text. The result was a penalty that prevented this practice from achieving keyword success for important keywords.

Clean domain names offer the best chance for success. Ultimately the issue was fixed by using a different domain and doing SEO the “white hat” way. There was no link manipulation and no trickery. We used a content focused strategy, including content marketing, blog development, continual on-page editing and use of relevant eye-care relationships. Ultimately this practice moved from page three for priority keyword to the number two spot on page one. The SEO logistics were dramatically shifted from the old SEO approach to the new SEO approach; with some basic care and regular maintenance, success was achieved. As for the original domain, it is still alive. As for its purpose in the future, it remains to be seen.

Key takeaways — the practice:

• Made some poor SEO decisions

• Earned a Google penalty after using poor link-building techniques

• Followed a game plan and gave it time to succeed

• To date, has five of the 16 total links on page one for that priority keyword

• Used other websites to achieve the goal without deleting the original site

• Had a strategy that used good local search and review generation along with SEO work.

CASE STUDY 2:

Good shape, poor exposure

This client came to us in fairly good condition. His site’s past history did not include any manipulative events that had a significant negative impact on its rankings, yet the link profile was fairly low. Ranking results were average, but not on page one, so traffic was limited and Web exposure was weak.

We took a custom-content approach with this website. We built a blog and worked this in with the distribution of social media. We worked with local optometrists to build links. We added content to website pages and updated it often. We actively requested patient reviews for the local profile pages for Yahoo, Google and Bing.

Despite the pressure to be number one organically in a fairly large city, we did not rush our strategy. After about 18 months of work, the website achieved the number one organic and local spot for the top priority keyword. This client performs more eye surgeries than ever and says that the website has a lot to do with this result. The physician is very in tune with this project, and still adds video and writes blog articles.

Key takeaways — the practice:

• Followed a game plan and stayed disciplined

• Did not engage in manipulative link building

• Worked with local optometrists to build web links

• Used only one trusted SEO source for controlled results

• Optimized local searches and put effort into review generation for multifaceted results.

CASE STUDY 3:

SEO failure

This example was the hardest and least successful SEO overhaul. This practice was penalized due to the site receiving an absurd amount of medically unconnected links; disconnecting them was akin to cleaning up a major oil spill.

Our guess: its old SEO company never got the memo from Google that this was a highly punishable technique (why would it make sense to have gambling websites and “Housewives of Bulgaria” linking to an eye doctor in the United States?) This practice’s manipulative SEO strategy failed, ruining the equity of a 15-year-old domain name in the process.

When a practice realizes that something is wrong, it must create a game plan and sign off on the line of work. The practice needs to buy into the theory and process, giving adequate time to correct the problem. Rushing through this process only makes things worse.

This practice, despite our discussion to establish a new game plan, chose to enlist two parties to work on the project at the same time. Each was unaware of the other’s participation. Both companies approached the problem differently. Each created websites for the client, and neither company could trace what was going on. Google clearly was confused, and probably considered this more manipulation. Disaster was the clear result.

Google penalizes the black hatters: those that manipulate how links are built and who duplicate content. White hatters climb the page: They pay attention to Google’s SEO rules.

SEO needs to be natural — when unnatural events happen, red flags go up. This practice wasted lots of money, with no success.

Key takeaways — this practice:

• Abused link building using nonrelevant links

• Used two companies simultaneously and did not let either one know about the other

• Did not follow any type of game plan

• Did not allow adequate time to let one strategy play out.

Conclusion

SEO is critical to your digital footprint. Used correctly, it will drive many serious, qualified eye-care patients. Keeping up with important SEO changes and trends can only benefit the amount of traffic coming to your website and ultimately through your practice’s doors. OM

About the Author
	Michael Dobkowski is a senior partner, managing director of search strategy and internet marketing at Glacial Multimedia Inc. He is a digital marketing veteran with 17+ years of experience helping ophthalmologists. A popular speaker at medical conferences, Mr. Dobkowski provides vital education about digital medical marketing concepts. 207-878-5900 or michael@glacial.com.