Therapies provided in nontraditional settings or by individuals without knowledge of core principles of infection prevention and control (IPC) may place consumers at risk of adverse events. We summarize findings from our recent consultation experiences in the Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion (DHQP) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to help identify targets for prevention efforts and enhanced consumer protections.

We reviewed records of DHQP consultations with state, local, or territorial health officials conducted from 2016 to 2023 to identify investigations involving nontraditional therapies or settings in the United States. Information collected included type of procedure or therapy, type of setting, pathogens involved, number of affected individuals, and types of IPC issues identified.

Of 1500 consultations, we identified 30 (2%) involving nontraditional therapies or settings. Therapies were performed for esthetic reasons, general wellness, or as treatment for pain. Infectious pathogens were identified in the blood, joint fluid, and skin and soft tissue, and included viruses, bacteria, and fungi. Investigations revealed breaches in injection safety, medical device reprocessing, medication preparation and handling, and environmental disinfection. Over 7000 consumers received notification regarding potential exposure to an infectious pathogen.

This summary highlights the potential infectious risks to consumers posed by nontraditional therapies, which may have unproven benefits and poorly defined risks. With continued expansion of nontraditional therapies and settings, consumers will benefit from education, training, and oversight of those who provide therapies in these settings.

To characterize and compare severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–specific immune responses in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) from nursing home residents during and after natural infection.

Prospective cohort.

Nursing home.

SARS-CoV-2–infected nursing home residents.

A convenience sample of 14 SARS-CoV-2–infected nursing home residents, enrolled 4–13 days after real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction diagnosis, were followed for 42 days. After diagnosis, plasma SARS-CoV-2–specific pan-Immunoglobulin (Ig), IgG, IgA, IgM, and neutralizing antibodies were measured at 5 time points, and GCF SARS-CoV-2–specific IgG and IgA were measured at 4 time points.

All participants demonstrated immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 12 phlebotomized participants, plasma was positive for pan-Ig and IgG in all 12 participants. Neutralizing antibodies were positive in 11 participants; IgM was positive in 10 participants, and IgA was positive in 9 participants. Among 14 participants with GCF specimens, GCF was positive for IgG in 13 participants and for IgA in 12 participants. Immunoglobulin responses in plasma and GCF had similar kinetics; median times to peak antibody response were similar across specimen types (4 weeks for IgG; 3 weeks for IgA). Participants with pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA detected in plasma and GCF IgG remained positive throughout this evaluation, 46–55 days after diagnosis. All participants were viral-culture negative by the first detection of antibodies.

Nursing home residents had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in plasma and GCF after infection. Kinetics of antibodies detected in GCF mirrored those from plasma. Noninvasive GCF may be useful for detecting and monitoring immunologic responses in populations unable or unwilling to be phlebotomized.