LUFT — Case Studies
Case Studies

Put your clinic data to work.

Four engagements, four practice type, four models. Each began with a data export and ended with growth levers ranked by maximum impact. Figures are the clinic's own, not benchmarks.

From clinic founders

Why the numbers mattered to us.

Feedback from independent clinic founders who have used LUFT analysis to identify retention, growth, and patient-lifecycle opportunities.

This was information I could not obtain from the standard reports in my EHR system. The analysis identified patterns in new patient visits and patient retention, along with suggestions on how to stabilize my business revenue using metrics I can track weekly.
Mike Tocco
Founder, Evolve Acupuncture · Royal Oak, MI
Luke was incredibly helpful in identifying a decline in patient retention over the past few years that has affected our bottom line.
Jane Gregorie
Founder, Acupuncture Denver
Several arc levers and actionable items were quickly identified and implemented, which have resulted in our patients investing more of their time and money in our clinic services.
Steve Drugan
Founder & CEO, Urban Acupuncture Center · Columbus, OH
LUFT Case Study · March 2026

Chrystal Clinic: $42,927 in year-one incremental revenue

A single-location integrative wellness clinic in Sycamore, IL. LUFT built the economic model, ranked five growth levers, and designed the operational playbook to pull them at zero incremental cost.

Acupuncture Massage Therapy Red Light Therapy Jan 2021 to Mar 2026 Jane.app Single Location
Revenue Impact

Five initiatives. Zero additional cost.

LUFT modelled five years of appointment data, ranked the growth levers by what each one returns, and translated the top five into specific operational actions. Here is what those actions are worth.

Year 1 Incremental Revenue
$42,927
From pricing, retention, and patient lifecycle initiatives
Incremental Cost
$0
Acupuncture Repricing
Three service tiers repriced for the first time in 2+ years
+$32,113/yr
$0 COST
MVP Recruitment
One additional high-engagement patient per month, compounding
+$6,978/yr
$0 COST
Jane Retention Automations
Post-visit rebooking reminder and 30-day drift check
+$3,491/yr
$0 COST
Massage Menu Repricing
Four underpriced services adjusted, menu simplified from 17 to 11
+$345/yr
$0 COST

Pricing initiatives implemented March 2026 and showing no volume drop-off. Jane retention automations and MVP recruitment in active deployment. All figures are gross revenue from services only.

Full Case Study

Five findings. The full data. Every action taken.

The complete report shows how each lever was identified, what it was worth, and the specific operational changes that captured it.

Visit-2 Drop-Off Analysis Acupuncture Pricing Model Retention-Growth Matrix Capacity & Utilization Menu Optimization 5-Year Compounding Model
Access the full case study
LUFT Case Study · Summer 2026

Fertility Acupuncture Practice: A conversion decline hiding inside flat revenue.

A fertility-focused acupuncture practice with revenue in the mid-$700Ks held flat for three years. LUFT identified the mechanism driving a steady multi-year decline in arc completion and quantified what restoring it is worth.

Fertility Acupuncture Single Location Multi-Modality
What the data showed

Three findings. A single cause.

Revenue looked stable. Underneath it, two measures had been moving against the practice for years, both tracing to the same mechanism.

Retention sprint in progress: rebuilding the rebooking engine
Annual recoverable revenue
$80K
Restoring arc completion to its earlier rate, on current patient intake
Four-year cumulative
$250K
Finding 01
Flat revenue was masking a structural decline.
Top-line revenue held in a narrow band for three years. That stability came entirely from rising revenue per visit, up roughly 40% over five years, which offset a steady fall in visit volume. Underneath the flat line, new-patient intake was declining at a double-digit annual rate and visit volume was contracting. The revenue number was covering the decline, not contradicting it.
+40%
revenue per visit over five years, masking volume decline
Finding 02
Fertility arc completion fell by a third in three years.
First-arc completion among new fertility patients declined from around 36% to under 24%. Every earlier funnel step, visit 2, visit 3 and visit 4, declined alongside it across the same cohort years. The same pattern appeared in general acupuncture, which carries no shorter-arc or patient-mix explanation, isolating the cause to the conversion process itself rather than anything clinical. A completer is worth nearly $3,500 in lifetime value. A non-completer is worth a fraction of that. The attrition is concentrated in the patients that account for the majority of the practice's value.
−12 pts
first-arc completion rate, over three cohort years
Finding 03
The cause was a single operational process that stopped running.
Ownership of rebooking shifted without a defined process to replace it. Treatment plans were not being used in the booking system to define the next visit, and reminder activity became manual and ad hoc. The result was measurable attrition among patients the practice had already paid to acquire. Restoring roughly 30 additional completers per year, closing the completion gap back to its earlier rate, is worth $80K annually and $250K over four years at current intake.
~30
additional completers per year at target rate, worth $80K annually

Analysis based on more than 43,000 completed visits across 4,000+ patients over six years. Clinic identity withheld; identifying figures rounded. Recovery projections based on restoring first-arc completion to its earlier rate at current intake. Completer lifetime value derived from visit history. All analysis runs on de-identified data.

Why this engagement mattered

The decline was years old before it was visible.

Rising revenue per visit is a genuine operational strength. It also made a structural problem invisible for long enough that it compounded significantly before the model surfaced it.

What the revenue line showed
Three years of flat revenue. A well-run practice with strong pricing power and a loyal returning base. No obvious crisis signal.
What the cohort data showed
A steady multi-year decline in arc completion across every funnel step, in both fertility and general acupuncture, running in parallel with a double-digit annual drop in new-patient intake.
The alternative explanation tested
A shift toward shorter-arc booking categories could have explained part of the decline. The data showed some shift in that direction, but core new-client fertility patients, the large majority of intake, showed the same completion decline on their own trajectory.
The compounding risk
Intake contracting and conversion declining at the same time is a compounding problem. As the top of the funnel narrows, converting existing patients carries a larger share of revenue, and a conversion decline accelerates faster against a smaller intake base.
What the analysis required

Cross-clinic pattern recognition, applied to a fertility practice.

The finding was not in the revenue number. It was in knowing where to look, what to test, and what the pattern meant for the response.

Knowing the pattern
A fertility conversion decline that tracks across every funnel step, in both primary and secondary modalities, is a known operational signature. Recognizing it across clinic types changes what you look for in the data and how quickly you find it.
Testing the alternative
A shift toward shorter-arc booking categories was the obvious counter-argument. It was tested directly against the data. It accounted for part of the decline. Core new-client fertility patients were completing less often on their own trajectory. That distinction changes what you do next.
Scoping the response correctly
The finding pointed to one mechanism. The right response was a contained rebuild of a specific process, not a broad retention overhaul. Getting that scope right is as important as identifying the opportunity in the first place.
LUFT Case Study · Spring 2026

Insurance-Mix Integrative Clinic: $100K+ in annual recoverable revenue, already in the building.

A multi-stream integrative practice with a roughly even split between insurance-billable and cash-pay services. LUFT analyzed the clinic's patient lifecycle data and quantified the revenue available from the existing patient base, at zero incremental acquisition cost.

Insurance-Mix Multi-Provider Multi-Stream Mature Practice
What the data showed

Three findings. One week of analysis.

The clinic was already well-run. The engagement was scoped to find what was harder to see from the inside: the patient lifecycle patterns that don't surface in standard dashboards.

Annual recoverable revenue
$100K+
From existing acquisition flow, on the same patient base
Incremental acquisition cost
$0
Finding 01
Front-of-funnel retention has degraded.
Visit-to-visit conversion in the first three patient visits fell materially over recent years, even as the clinic's later-stage retention held strong. The late funnel was working. The clinical work was excellent. The gap was entirely operational: scheduling, follow-up cadence, and the transitions between early visits. Returning early-funnel conversion to its historic rate represents over $100,000 in additional annual revenue on the same acquisition flow, compounding forward as each recaptured cohort generates subsequent visits.
$100K+
recoverable annually, on current acquisition flow
Finding 02
An invisible reactivation engine, already running.
A steady stream of patients, dozens each month, were returning to the practice after gaps of 90 days or more, with no internal process in place to track or accelerate it. No campaign. No triggered outreach. Patients were coming back on their own initiative, or through ad hoc front-desk follow-up, and no standard report surfaces the pattern. The engine was real, unmeasured, and completely untapped as a deliberate lever.
90+
day lapse window, closed organically by dozens of patients monthly
Finding 03
Single-provider concentration: a structural exposure.
A disproportionate share of the clinic's highest-value patients concentrated around one provider, with visit-loyalty rates above 90%. This is not a problem with that provider. It reflects a strong clinical relationship. It is a structural exposure: if that provider's hours changed, a meaningful share of MVP revenue would be at risk, because those patients had no established relationship with anyone else on the team. Named as an observation, not an immediate action item, and worth holding as context for any future hiring or capacity decision.
~1/3
of highest-value patients concentrated on one provider

Analysis based on multi-year appointment export. Clinic identity withheld; identifying figures rounded. Revenue figures are directional; order-of-magnitude characterization based on diagnostic-layer data. All analysis runs on de-identified data; no patient information leaves the clinic's systems.

Why this engagement mattered

A well-run practice, with a gap the dashboards couldn't show.

The clinic was already tracking more than most practices its size. The work wasn't about finding obvious problems. It was about finding the ones that standard reporting can't surface.

What the clinic could already see
Revenue by service line, new patient volume, appointment counts, and a rough sense of who was active. A well-maintained practice management system and an experienced team.
What the model surfaced
Cohort-level funnel degradation invisible in aggregate reports. An organic reactivation pattern running with no instrumentation. Provider-level concentration that looked fine in the revenue numbers until modeled explicitly.
The reframe that landed
The clinical work was strong. Late-funnel retention had actually improved. The opportunity was in the operational layer between a strong patient experience and durable, compounding economics: visits 1 through 3.
The finding that surprised
The reactivation engine. The pattern had been running for years without anyone tracking it, and no standard report would ever have surfaced it.
What the engagement delivered

From data export to delivered findings in one week.

One export from the practice management system. Three deliverables back.

Written decision brief
Three findings with quantified revenue opportunities, supporting analysis, and a clear frame on what each finding requires to act on.
Top 50 by LTV
A ranked list of the practice's highest-value patients mapped by provider, tenure, retention status, and payer mix. An operational artifact, not just a report.
45-minute walkthrough
Findings presented live in a working session, not a deck review. The founder pushed back, asked hard questions, and left with a clear picture of what to do next.
LUFT Case Study · Spring 2026

Community Acupuncture Practice: A stable base with $150–230K in recoverable revenue.

A multi-modality practice running both community and private acupuncture, with a stable returning patient base and a quiet contraction running underneath it. LUFT identified three levers, grounded in five years of patient data, that address the contraction without adding a single new patient.

Community Acupuncture Private Acupuncture Multi-Modality
What was working
+8 pts
Visit-1 to visit-2 conversion, up across four cohort years
750+
Returning patients per year, stable across five years
Flat
Revenue per visit, held despite a double-digit volume decline
What the data showed

Three findings. One sequence.

The returning base was solid. The contraction was real. And the three levers that address it have to be worked in a specific order, because each one sets up the next.

Conservative combined annual uplift
$150–230K
Service mix, arc completion, and pricing, before any new patients
Per arc completion point
$40K+
Finding 01
The business is contracting quietly.
New patient intake fell by roughly a quarter over three years and continued declining into this year. Revenue held only through a quiet mix shift: community acupuncture volume dropped while private acupuncture and massage held flat, partially offsetting the decline. That buffer is not unlimited. Underneath flat revenue, visits were down double digits and new patients were down roughly a quarter, with the mix shift covering the contraction rather than reversing it.
~25%
decline in new patient intake over three years, still continuing
Finding 02
Arc completion is the primary lever.
Roughly a third of new patients complete a treatment arc of six or more visits. Those patients generate over 80% of revenue at nearly 10x the lifetime value of non-completers. Every one-percentage-point improvement in arc completion moves dozens of patients from a lifetime value in the low hundreds to north of $1,300, worth over $40,000 in incremental revenue per point. The drop-off concentrates in visits 2 through 6. Patients who reach visit 2 are already on a treatment rhythm. The question is whether anything sustains it through to completion.
~10x
LTV multiplier, arc completers vs. non-completers
Finding 03
Community and private trajectories diverge early, and the flow between them is counterintuitive.
Private acupuncture patients convert at higher rates at every measured milestone: reaching visit 2, reaching visit 7 or more, and cross-selling to another service, where the gap runs more than twofold. Average lifetime value runs nearly 2x higher for private entrants. The counterintuitive finding is the flow between them: roughly a third of private patients entered through community first, while fewer than one in ten community patients moved to private. Community functions as the high-volume front door to higher-value relationships. Whether the economics of that door are optimized is the question the service mix analysis is built to answer.
~2x
LTV gap, private vs. community entrants

Analysis based on more than 53,000 completed visits across 3,700+ new patients over five years. Clinic identity withheld; identifying figures rounded. Uplift figures are directional estimates grounded in the clinic's own LTV and arc completion data. Revenue figures are imputed from visit volume and average revenue per visit. All analysis runs on de-identified data.

What the analysis required

Cross-clinic pattern recognition, applied to a dual-modality practice.

The findings were clear. The harder work was knowing what to do with them, and in what order.

Knowing the pattern
Arc completion as the primary revenue lever is a cross-clinic pattern. Recognizing it here, and knowing the per-point figure is grounded in this clinic's own data rather than an industry benchmark, changes the weight you give the finding.
Reading the flow correctly
The dominant patient flow was private patients discovering community, not the reverse. That finding reframes the role of community acupuncture from a lower-value service to a structural front door, which changes both the service mix question and how you think about pricing it.
Knowing what not to do first
A follow-on package built before the service mix is settled risks optimizing patients toward the wrong destination. Pricing moved before the funnel is right locks in economics built on a structure that is about to change. The sequence matters as much as the findings.
Naming what was working
Visit-1 to visit-2 conversion improved 8 points across four cohort years. The returning base held steady through a location change and a new-patient decline. The clinical work was strong. The problem was structural, not clinical.
Where this points

Three questions, in one order.

The levers are sequenced because each one enables the next. Service mix first, then arc completion, then pricing.

Service mix
What does the right allocation between community and private look like, given actual provider capacity and the patient flow already running between them? Conservative uplift: $30–50K annually.
Arc completion
A follow-on package designed from the actual drop-off pattern in visits 2 through 6, structured to move patients through the arc without discounting those who would have completed it anyway. Conservative uplift: $80–130K annually.
Pricing
Revenue per visit has been flat for five years through meaningful cost inflation. Once the mix and patient journey are right, pricing can be revisited holistically: which services, in what sequence, at what churn cost. Conservative uplift: $35–50K annually.

What would the model find in yours?

LUFT works with a small number of independent clinics each quarter. It starts with one export from your practice management system.

Start the conversation