Condition-focused landing pages for a clinic: +81% conversions
Test run byKlientBoostCRO agency
Commentary byLiftArchiveOur analysis, not theirsConversion volume rose 81% after KlientBoost built condition-specific landing pages and kept testing them alongside rebuilt paid search campaigns.
KlientBoost ran this for University Foot & Ankle Institute, a regenerative medicine practice, and published it as a PDF case study.
Campaign and page changes shipped together, so the gain can't be credited to the pages alone.
- Conversion volume: up 81%, with no increase in budget reported.
- Cost per conversion: down 39%.
- Clicks: up 173% and cost per click down 62%, so much of the gain came from cheaper, larger traffic.
- Clicks grew faster than conversions, which suggests the overall conversion rate did not rise. Our reading, since no rate was shared.
The change
Each condition gets its own page instead of one general practice page.
Simplified mockup drawn by LiftArchive from the shared screenshots.
Control
Paid search traffic went to the practice's earlier pages and campaigns. The case study does not describe those pages.
Variant
KlientBoost made a separate landing page for each condition and kept split testing them. It also rebuilt the account with single keyword ad groups, a granular structure and a dynamic search ads campaign.
Why it likely won
Our reading of the result, not the practitioner's claim.
- Patients search by condition, so a page about their exact problem likely feels more relevant than a general clinic page.
- Cheaper clicks let the same budget buy far more traffic, which lifts conversion volume on its own.
- Ongoing page testing means the reported pages were refined over time, not one fixed version.
Caveats: KlientBoost reported this as a before-and-after result of a full paid-media engagement, not a clean split test of one page. Ads, keywords, targeting and landing pages changed together, and no sample size, duration or significance was shared. The text says conversions more than doubled while the headline stat is 81%, so figures may cover different periods.
Who ran it
KlientBoost ran this test for foot and ankle regenerative medicine practice and published the results (KlientBoost case study (PDF)). The numbers are theirs; the summary and commentary on this page are ours.
Read the original case study on KlientBoost →
How to run this test on your site
- Hypothesis
- If we send each condition's search ads to a page about that condition, then more visitors will book because the page speaks to their exact problem.
- Primary metric
- Appointment requests per landing page visitor
- Guardrails
- Cost per booked appointment
- Share of leads that become patients
- Call volume
- Who should test it
- Clinics and service practices that treat several distinct conditions or needs. It is less useful if you offer one service that people search for in one way.
Questions
Should a medical practice use separate landing pages for each condition?
If people search for distinct conditions, separate pages let the headline and copy match each search.
It also makes ad relevance easier to keep high.
Why did clicks rise more than conversions?
Cheaper clicks brought in much more traffic. Volume grew, but the per-visitor rate likely did not climb as fast.
How do I know the pages caused the lift?
You can't from this case. Run a split test with the same traffic going to the old and new page.
Similar tests
KlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoost