Results · Healthcare technology
Sydra
From invisible to 7.2x the inbound leads within eight months
Independent dispute resolution software for healthcare providers, with a 116,000 page regulatory catalog
Today a provider searching what a procedure code pays in their state against their payer lands on this company's page, not a competitor's blog. Organic search brings in roughly three of every four form fills, paid spend optimizes against real leads for the first time, and month seven was the best organic month on record. Before the rebuild the site was invisible for those searches.
7.2x
Inbound form fills
Months five through eight against the six months before start
4.1x
Organic search clicks
19 to 9
Average Google position
Page two to page one
74%
Of form fills now come from organic search
Current share; prior tracking was broken
Month 7
Best organic month on record
Still climbing
First eight months of engagement. Multiples against the client's own prior six month baseline. Method and sources below.
The situation
Federal dispute resolution rules for out of network claims change several times a year, and each change moves the math for every provider, payer, and state. The company had strong win rates and deep expertise but a website that answered none of the questions providers were actually searching: what a given procedure code pays in a given state against a given payer.
Paid search was the only reliable lead source. Conversion tracking counted several actions as leads that were not, so reported cost per lead was wrong and budget decisions were made on bad numbers.
What we ran
01 Build
One page for every code, state, and payer
We built a programmatic catalog of 116,000 pages covering 190 procedure codes across 51 states and 12 payers, each generated from the company's own reimbursement data with full schema markup. Pages release in waves through an index gate so nothing thin goes live.
02 Rank
Ranking on the questions regulation creates
Every federal rule change and court ruling produces a wave of provider searches. A sitewide answer engine audit restructured the site so each of those questions has a direct, schema marked answer, and a safeguard system updates positioning across the site when the rules move. Rule changes, court decisions, and jurisdiction guides are rewritten in house voice within days of publication, and a monthly LinkedIn campaign runs from live site content.
03 Run
Eight campaigns, one real conversion
Paid search was rebuilt into eight buyer intent segments. Conversion tracking was corrected so only a submitted lead form counts, and campaign spend now optimizes against real leads.
04 Buy
Not in this engagement.
05 Book
Outbound built from a verified list
A master list of organizations handling dispute resolution was segmented into cohorts, with a five email cold sequence, LinkedIn follow up, and an eighteen play runbook so outbound and inbound feed the same calendar.
06 Educate
Not in this engagement.
Why it worked
Regulation does the demand generation. Every rule change and court ruling sends providers to Google with a specific question about a specific code in a specific state. A site with one page per code, state, and payer combination is standing there with the answer. A site with ten articles is not.
Leads grew faster than clicks, 7.2x against 4.1x. A provider who lands on the exact reimbursement page they searched for has already qualified themselves, and fixing conversion tracking meant paid spend stopped chasing actions that were never leads.
Timeline
Month 1
Sitewide audit, reimbursement data model, and index gate defined
Month 2
First data wave live, conversion tracking corrected to one real action
Month 3
Eight campaign paid search structure live, impressions 3x the prior baseline
Month 4
Full catalog indexed, impressions 4x the prior baseline
Month 5
Form fills cross 7x the prior monthly average and hold
Month 7
Best organic month on record. Regulatory content and outbound running on schedule
Who this fits
- ·Healthcare software companies whose buyers search by code, state, or payer
- ·Regulated B2B companies where every rule change creates a new wave of search demand
- ·Teams whose paid search reports count actions that are not leads
How we report these numbers
Every case study on this site covers the first eight months of an engagement and nothing after. We chose a fixed window so studies are comparable to each other and so a strong later month cannot inflate the story.
Each result is the average of months five through eight of the engagement divided by the client's own average over the six months before our start date. Same window for every stat and every brand, so no study can pick a flattering baseline. Where a client's tracking was broken before we arrived, we say so and report current share rather than growth.
Clients are named with their permission. Raw exports behind any figure, including search console and CRM data, are available on request under NDA.
Across the other brands we run, first eight month results have landed within a few points of the studies shown here. Each is added as it passes month eight.
This study
Baseline for every stat is the six months before engagement start. Lead source tracking was unreliable before our start, so the organic share figure is current share, not growth. Paid search figures use the corrected conversion definition only.
- ·Google Search Console monthly and daily exports
- ·CRM contact and form submission exports by first conversion date
- ·Google Ads conversion export, submitted lead form only
The division of labor
Your only job is to close.