Harrahill’s technique: a simple screening test for intra-abdominal pressure measurement

Background Repair of giant incisional hernias may lead to an increase in intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and, sometimes, to abdominal compartment syndrome. Measurement of IAP using Kron’s technique (Kron et al. in Ann Surg 199:28–30, 1984 ) is currently accepted as the gold standard, whereas Harrahill has described a simple measurement setup using urinary drainage manometry (Harrahill in J Emerg Nurs 24:465–466, 1998 ). The aim of this clinical trail was to evaluate the correlation, reproducibility and effectiveness of this device. Methods A prospective cohort study was performed in 43 patients undergoing elective standard abdominal intervention with laparotomy. These patients remain under surveillance in the intensive care unit and require a urinary catheter because of the operation. We performed comparative measurements of IAP using both Korn’s (IVM) and Harrahill’s (UDM) technique. Results Evaluating the correlation between the IVM and UDM techniques, we measured median IAPs of 9.8 ± 4.1 mmHg (2.9–19.9 mmHg) and 10.0 ± 4.1 mmHg (min–max: 1.5–19.9 mmHg), respectively. Pearson’s coefficient of correlation was r = 0.97. The average of difference between UDM and IVM was −0.2 ± 0.9 mmHg with limits of agreement of −1.7 to 2.0 mmHg. Evaluating the reproducibility of Harrahill’s technique, we found median IAPs of 10.4 ± 2.1 mmHg (min–max: 2.9–19.1 mmHg) and 10.4 ± 2.7 mmHg (3.7–19.9 mmHg), respectively, in 43 comparative measurements (Pearson’s coefficient of correlation, r = 0.97. The average difference between both measurements was −0.1 ± 1.1 mmHg with limits of agreement of −2.3 to 2.2 mmHg. Conclusions We were able to demonstrate good correlation and high reproducibility of IAP measurement using Harrahill’s technique compared to the gold standard Korn method. We consider this technique as a suitable method for quick and simple screening test for intra-abdominal hypertension, especially after repair of giant incisional hernias.