The campaign
This Meta campaign ran for 30 days while the clinic was trying us out. We kept the budget small on purpose, to prove the numbers before spending more.
$1,430 in ads brought in 374 leads at $3.82 each. 34 of those leads booked in as new patients (9%), so each new patient cost $42.06.
A 9% booking rate might sound low. Here's why it isn't.
What made the leads so cheap
This clinic came to us with something most don't have: an audience. They were already posting on Instagram and TikTok, and they had a following that watched their content.
That changed what we could do with the budget. We didn't have to guess which videos would work, because their best organic videos had already proved themselves in front of real people. We put ad money behind those instead of starting from zero, and we could show ads to people who already knew the clinic rather than paying to introduce it to strangers.
We still tested: video formats, opening hooks, ad copy. But testing on top of content that has already worked is far cheaper than testing from scratch. That's the main reason 374 people put their hand up at $3.82 each.
Why 9% of leads booked
Facebook and Instagram ads interrupt people. Nobody opens Instagram looking for a chiropractor, so some of the people who respond are curious rather than committed. On top of that, this clinic's first visit is $250, which is a serious decision to make from a phone.
For a first visit at that price, from interrupted traffic, 9 to 10% booking in is a normal result, not a broken one. The math still works, because of what happens after that first appointment.
What the first visits brought in
Every new patient started with a $250 initial assessment.
34 patients × $250 = $8,500 from first visits alone.
That's $5.94 back for every $1 spent, before a single follow-up visit.
Revenue over time
The first visit is only the start. A few of these patients never came back, but most continued care, and several signed up for care plans of $1,800 or more. Many patients keep coming back for years.
Averaged across all 34 patients, including the ones who only came in once, each new patient brings in $800 in revenue.
34 patients × $800 = $27,200 in revenue from $1,430 in ads.
The return
That's a 19.0× return: every $1 spent on ads brings back $19.02.
If a machine paid you $19.02 for every $1 you put in, how much would you put in? This clinic answered that question. After the trial, it grew its ad budget to $10,000 a month.
Where this clinic really won
The 19× return isn't only an advertising result. These patients didn't come once and leave. They went on to care, and several signed up for plans of $1,800 or more, which is what turned a $250 first visit into $800 in average revenue per patient.
If all 34 had come once and never come back, the campaign would still have brought in $8,500 from $1,430 of ads. The continuing care is what made it a 19× month.
Room to grow
9% was a fair result for a $250 first visit, but it isn't a ceiling. On lower-priced first visits we see 15–20% of Meta leads book in. If this campaign had reached 15%, the same 374 leads would have meant 56 new patients instead of 34, from the same $1,430.
What the numbers mean for your clinic
Three numbers do all the work here, and you can run them on your own practice tonight.
- A new patient cost $42.06 to bring in ($1,430 ÷ 34).
- The first visit brought back $250, so the ad spend was repaid almost six times over at the first appointment.
- Each patient went on to bring in $800 on average.
A patient who costs $42 and brings in $800 is the whole business case. While that gap holds, spending more on ads means making more revenue, which is exactly why this clinic went from a $1,430 trial to a $10,000 monthly budget.
Your version of this is simple arithmetic: what you charge for a first visit, what an average patient pays you over their time with you, and what it costs you to get one. At this clinic's cost per patient, 10 new patients a month would take about $420 in ad spend and 30 would take about $1,260.
Questions clinic owners ask
Why was the cost per lead so low?
Mostly because the clinic already had an audience and content that worked. We put budget behind videos that had already performed organically, and we could reach people who already knew the practice. Starting from scratch, expect to pay more per lead while the creative is being tested.
Would this work without a social following?
Yes, but the first month looks different: more of the budget goes into testing, and leads cost more. Even if leads had cost twice as much here, the same 34 patients would have come from about $2,860 in ads, and the return would still have been better than 9×.
9% booked. Isn't that low?
It's normal for a $250 first visit from Facebook and Instagram. These people weren't searching for a chiropractor; the ad found them. Cheaper first visits book a higher percentage and higher-priced ones book fewer, but each patient is worth more. The percentage in the middle matters less than the revenue at the end.
What produced the $800 average?
Continuing care. Several of these patients signed up for plans of $1,800 or more, and averaged across all 34, including the ones who came once, each new patient brought in $800. The first visit is the start of the revenue, not the whole of it.
What would it cost me to get 10 new patients a month?
At this clinic's numbers, about $420 a month in ad spend. Work out your own the same way: cost per new patient, times how many you want.
Why show a 30-day trial instead of a full year?
Because a small budget shows the economics honestly. If the numbers work on $1,430, they work on $10,000. This clinic proved that themselves.
How we count revenue
Revenue counts what new patients spend over time, not just the first visit. Each study multiplies its new patients by that clinic’s own average revenue per patient. First visit revenue is shown separately.