. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jul 31.

Published in final edited form as: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2019 Nov 5;8(4):1443–1446.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2019.10.028

TABLE II.

Imaging during ED visits with HAE vs angioedema

Imaging	HAE diagnosis	Angioedema diagnosis
Imaging	% of visits (95% CI) Weighted frequency	% of visits (95% CI) Weighted frequency	Adjusted OR^* (95% CI)	P value
Abdominal CT	2.7% (1.8%-3.6%) 237	0.3% (0.3%-0.4%) 699	9.32 (6.26-13.86)	<.0001
Noncontrast CT	1.1% (0.5%-1.6%) 92	0.1% (0.1%-0.2%) 304	8.62 (4.81-15.42)	<.0001
Contrast CT	1.7% (1.0%-2.3%) 149	0.2% (0.1%-0.2%) 395	9.90 (6.04-16.24)	<.0001
Abdominal x-ray	1.7% (0.9%-2.4%) 146	0.1% (0.1%-0.2%) 261	13.26 (7.43-23.67)	<.0001
Intubation	0.2% (0.0%-0.4%) 15	0.2% (0.1%-0.2%) 414	1.10 (0.31-3.89)	.90
Chest x-ray	5.8% (4.3%-7.2%) 507	6.5% (6.1%-6.9%) 13,960	1.09 (0.79-1.51)	.69

Wtd Freq, weighted frequency; OR, odds ratio

Bold text indicates that the P value was statistically significant. Regression models were not constructed for cells with 0 cases.

Adjusted models adjusted for age (continuous), sex, and insurance payer.