The aims of this study were to assess factors associated with catastrophic healthcare expenditure (CHE) and the burden of out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for specific healthcare services in Peru. We used data from 30,966 households that participated in the 2016 National Household Survey (Encuesta Nacional de Hogares, ENAHO). Participants reported household characteristics and expenditure on ten healthcare services. CHE was defined as healthcare spending equal to or higher than 40% of the household's capacity to pay. The associations of various household characteristics and OOP payments for specific healthcare services with CHE were assessed in logistic regression models. Poorer, rural and smaller households as well as those with older adults and individuals with chronic conditions had greater odds of facing CHE. According to the estimates from the adjusted regression model, healthcare services could be grouped into three groups. Medical tests, surgery and medication were in the first group with odds ratios (ORs) between 6.43 and 4.72. Hospitalisation, outpatient, dental and eye care were in the second group with ORs between 2.61 and 1.46. Child care, maternity care and other healthcare services (such as contraceptives, rehabilitation, etc.) were in the third group with non-significant ORs. Many Peruvian households are forced to finance their healthcare through OOP payments, burdening their finances to the extent of affecting their living standards.

Aim To evaluate the association between outpatient’s perceived psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics and experiencing discrimination at a Peruvian public hospital. Material and methods Cross-sectional study in a Peruvian public hospital, where 207 outpatients (18–30 years old) were surveyed. We asked participants about self-reported experiences of discrimination in the last six months at a Peruvian public hospital using a question from the Peruvian National Household Survey on Living Conditions and Poverty (ENAHO) 2017. We also measured the perceived psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics with the Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ). Additionally, we evaluated age, sex, ethnicity, education, income, and reason for being discriminated against. Association was assessed with Poisson regression using a robust estimator of variance and reporting prevalence ratios with 95% confidence intervals in crude and adjusted models. Results About two out of every five participants having experienced discrimination at a Peruvian public hospital in the last six months. On our adjusted estimates, we found discrimination to be positively associated with two components of the psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics, which were social impact (PR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00–1.04) and the psychological impact (PR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04–1.10). Conversely, dental self-confidence (PR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93–0.98) was negatively associated with discrimination. Conclusions The perceived psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics is associated with experiencing discrimination among outpatients from a Peruvian public hospital. We advocate for structural changes to address discrimination in healthcare spaces by corresponding governmental authorities.