03
Sep
2026
03
Sep
2026
The cost-of-living crisis is creating challenges that extend beyond household finances. New research suggests that financial pressure and associated stress may also be influencing the experience of patients living with inflammatory and dry skin conditions – creating new considerations for clinics supporting them.
For aesthetic, dermatology and skincare professionals, understanding the wider factors affecting patients' skin health could be increasingly important as financial pressures continue to influence lifestyle, treatment decisions and access to care.
Research commissioned by Hydromol and conducted by OnePoll surveyed 1,000 respondents about the relationship between the cost-of-living crisis, stress and skin health.
Almost seven in 10 respondents said their stress levels had been affected by the cost-of-living crisis.
More than a third reported that their dry skin symptoms had worsened, while 42% said stress or anxiety was contributing to more frequent flare-ups.
Other financial pressures identified by respondents included:
The survey also identified differences between demographic groups, with particularly high levels of reported cost-of-living-related stress among London respondents, Gen Z and Millennials.
These findings should be viewed in context: this is self-reported survey data and demonstrates an association in people's experiences rather than establishing that financial stress directly causes inflammatory skin conditions.
For practitioners, the findings reinforce the importance of looking beyond the immediate skin complaint.
Patients experiencing persistent stress may also be experiencing changes in sleep, diet, exercise, skincare routines and healthcare access. These factors can all influence how patients manage an existing condition.
Stress can also have physiological effects. Psychological stress has been associated with changes in immune and inflammatory pathways, potentially influencing the skin barrier and inflammatory activity.
This makes the patient consultation particularly important.
A patient presenting with worsening dryness or inflammation may not simply need a change of product. Understanding recent lifestyle changes, stressors, treatment adherence and access to prescribed care may provide a more complete picture.
The cost of managing chronic skin conditions can create another layer of complexity.
Patients may face costs associated with:
When household budgets become tighter, healthcare and skincare decisions may be reassessed.
For clinics, this presents an opportunity to ensure that patient communication remains realistic and supportive rather than assuming that every patient can maintain the same treatment or skincare routine regardless of circumstances.
Financial pressure can influence healthcare behaviour in several ways.
Some patients may delay appointments. Others may reduce the frequency with which they purchase products or treatments, switch to cheaper alternatives or attempt to manage symptoms themselves.
For clinics, this makes clear communication particularly valuable.
Patients should understand which aspects of their treatment are clinically important, which products or procedures are optional and when professional assessment is necessary.
This is also relevant to aesthetic clinics. Patients seeking cosmetic treatments may have increasingly complex priorities when deciding where to spend disposable income.
The patient journey therefore needs to consider not only clinical suitability but also expectations, affordability and long-term treatment planning.
A thorough consultation has always been fundamental to safe practice, but wider socioeconomic pressures can make open communication even more important.
Practitioners may wish to consider asking appropriate questions around:
These conversations should remain proportionate and professional. Practitioners are not expected to solve a patient's financial or mental health difficulties, but recognising relevant factors can help provide more appropriate care and signposting.
The findings also highlight why personalised care matters.
Two patients with apparently similar skin symptoms may have very different circumstances. One may have easy access to specialist care and a comprehensive skincare routine, while another may be struggling with treatment costs, stress or competing household priorities.
For clinics, personalisation doesn't necessarily mean recommending more products or treatments.
In some cases, it may mean simplifying a routine, prioritising essential treatment, providing clear aftercare information or directing a patient towards an appropriate healthcare professional.
There are several practical lessons for clinics:
Encourage practitioners to understand the patient's current circumstances rather than focusing solely on the presenting concern.
Patients should understand what is clinically necessary, what is optional and what ongoing maintenance may involve.
Financial pressures make transparent communication particularly important. Recommendations should be clinically appropriate rather than driven by assumptions about what a patient can afford.
Clear aftercare advice can help patients understand how to look after their skin between appointments and recognise when further professional advice is needed.
Aesthetic practitioners should recognise when symptoms fall outside their scope of practice and refer patients appropriately.
Where appropriate, clinics can discuss realistic treatment schedules and expectations rather than assuming patients will always be able to maintain the same level of spending.
The cost-of-living crisis presents a challenge for both patients and healthcare professionals, but it also highlights the importance of patient-centred care.
Skin health is influenced by a combination of biological, psychological, environmental and lifestyle factors. Financial stress can intersect with several of these.
For clinics, the takeaway isn't that every flare-up should be attributed to stress or that practitioners should become financial or mental health advisers.
Instead, it is about recognising the wider context in which patients are managing their skin – and ensuring that consultations, treatment recommendations and aftercare remain appropriate to the individual.
As financial pressures continue to influence healthcare behaviour, clinics that communicate clearly, prioritise patient welfare and take a genuinely individualised approach will be better placed to support patients through changing circumstances.
Financial stress can contribute to psychological stress, which has been associated with inflammatory and immune processes involved in skin conditions. However, financial stress should not automatically be considered the cause of a patient's symptoms, as skin conditions can have multiple triggers.
Practitioners don't need to conduct a mental health assessment, but appropriate questions about recent lifestyle changes, sleep, stress and treatment adherence may help provide useful context. Any concerns outside the practitioner's scope should be appropriately referred.
Treatment should always be based on clinical need, patient suitability and informed consent. However, discussing realistic treatment plans and distinguishing essential care from optional or maintenance treatments can help patients make informed decisions.
Yes. Patients experiencing financial difficulties may delay appointments, reduce purchases of skincare products or medicines, or change their routines. Practitioners should avoid making assumptions and instead encourage patients to discuss any difficulties that could affect their treatment.
The practitioner should avoid diagnosing or treating conditions beyond their competence and should refer the patient to an appropriate GP, dermatologist or other suitably qualified healthcare professional where necessary. Patient safety should take priority over proceeding with an aesthetic treatment.
Read it? Loved it? Want to share it?
