Measuring My Work – High Grade Assessment Tool (Found In Hospitals And Universities)

I’ve been looking into integrating a new evaluation tool into my work.

Not to change what I do —but to make it visible.

So I reached out to a representative working with the Kinvent products, a tool commonly used in physiotherapy, rehabilitation, performance and even medical settings.

We organized a meeting.

She came to present how it’s typically used:

• strength testing

• progress tracking

• structured rehab protocols (often over weeks or months)

• interactive feedback to guide exercises

A very solid system.

Clear. Measurable. Progressive.

TWO DIFFERENT INTENTIONS

In that model:

You measure → then you train → then you reassess over time

In mine:

You measure → you change the system → you re-measure immediately

Same tool.

Different question.

So I asked her:

“Can we test it my way?”

She said yes.

WHO WE WERE TESTING

This matters.

She wasn’t just “a client.”

• Background in physiotherapy

• Years of clinical experience

• Familiar with protocols, progression, and outcomes

• Used to seeing expected results unfold over time

And she also had her own ongoing situation:

• Past rotator cuff rupture (left)

• Current discomfort on the right

• Limited range on the left despite consistent work — even while “feeling better”

• Ongoing effort… with partial results

None the less, this is a routine she must maintain because she can’t afford to stop training.

In her words:

“If I stop training, my head starts spinning.”

So even with knowledge and discipline:

The system still needed constant management to stay stable.

From that perspective, this is not unusual.

But underneath:

There is fatigue.

There is frustration.

There is the persistent question:

“Why?”

STEP 1 — BASELINE… AND SOMETHING UNEXPECTED

We started testing.

Then I noticed something simple.

A watch.

We tested with it.Then without it.

Immediately:

• Strength increased

• Asymmetry dropped significantly

• Mobility improved — especially on the restricted side (her left shoulder, previously limited, now moved past ear level and nearly matched the right)

Nothing was trained.

Nothing was “worked on.”

Yet the system changed.

Her reaction said it all.

WHAT JUST HAPPENED? (AND WHY IT MATTERS)

Research has shown that:

• The skin feeds the brain’s map of the body (somatosensory cortex)

• The brain organizes output based on incoming sensory information (Proske & Gandevia, 2012)

• Even subtle changes in input can shift:

  • Motor output

  • coordination

  • force production

  • perception of movement

So this wasn’t about the watch.

It revealed something more important:

The system organizes around the information it receives

ANOTHER IMPORTANT DETAIL

The watch alone changed output significantly.

This opens an important question:

👉 how much do everyday inputs influence movement?

• watches

• tattoos

• pressure on the skin

• external devices

The body does not ignore these.

It integrates them.

Constantly.

STEP 2 — INTERNAL REORGANIZATION

Then I did what I normally do.

Not exercises.

Not protocols.

I clarified key references:

• foot input

• pelvic and abdominal integration (including past C-sections (3))

• diaphragm coordination

• scapular and fascial relationships

No repetition.

No load.

And this is key:

The entire sequence — including testing — happened within ~2 minutes.

THE RESULT

• Strength increased on both sides

• The previously “injured” side became stronger

• Overall asymmetry dropped to near zero (from 10.3% → 1.4%)

• Significant improvement without added effort

Measured.

Objective.

Immediate.

THE PARADOX BECOMES VISIBLE

From a conventional perspective:

• progress takes time

• strength requires training (yes to increase it)

• symmetry is built gradually

But here:

• The “injured” side wasn’t the limiting factor

• The most worked-on area wasn’t the most functional

• No training was added

And yet everything improved.

So the real question becomes:

What was actually limiting the system?

THE ANSWER ISN’T EFFORT

This aligns with what research has been pointing toward:

• Motor control is adaptive, not purely strength-based (Hodges & Tucker, 2011)

• Body maps can change quickly with sensory input (Moseley, 2008)

• Interoception influences output insula, predictive processing models (Craig, 2009; Barrett, 2017)

In other words:

The body expresses what it can organize — not just what it can produce

THE LOOP MOST PEOPLE LIVE IN

This explains something many people live:

• Train → feel better

• Stop → everything comes back

• Repeat

Because:

The system never changed its reference

Only the effort around it increased

So over time:

Doing more becomes the only way to stay the same

WHAT CHANGED HERE

Not the muscles.

Not the program.

Not the effort.

The organization.

And once that shifted:

• force increased

• symmetry normalized

• movement freed up

WHY THIS MOMENT MATTERED

For me, this confirmed something I already knew — but now measured.

For her, it was different.

Because she didn’t just feel it.

She saw it.

In real time.On a device she uses professionally.

And that’s where the shift happened.

WHAT THIS OPENS

This is just the beginning.

Because tools like this don’t just measure strength.

They can reveal:

• how the system distributes load

• where it compensates

• how quickly it reorganizes

Not over weeks.

But in seconds.

WHAT THIS REALLY SHOWS

This wasn’t about technology.

It was about what the technology made visible.

When the system receives clearer information,it reorganizes immediately.

Less effort.

More coherence.

Better access to what was already there.

A DIFFERENT WAY TO LOOK AT THE BODY

What if:

• Your limitations are not where you feel them

• Your strength is already there, but not accessible

• Your system is doing its best… with the information it has

And when that information changes:

Everything else follows.

WHAT THIS IS NOT

This is not:

• a strength program

• a replacement for training

• a “quick fix”

THE SHIFT

Effort-based approach:

→ depends on constant input

→ requires maintenance

→ builds capacity

Organization-based approach:

→ changes how the system functions

→ improves efficiency

→ reduces compensation

If you:

• feel one side always works more

• have recurring pain despite training

• plateau even with good programs

Then:

👉 the issue may not be effort

Visite here to see what we can do together

Andy Audet – Un Corps Équilibré

Specialist in Body Recalibration and Human Performance

Saint-Bruno-De-Montarville, Québec

References

Barrett, L. F. (2017). How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Craig, A. D. (2009). How do you feel — now? The anterior insula and human awareness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(1), 59–70.

Hodges, P. W., & Tucker, K. (2011). Moving differently in pain: A new theory to explain the adaptation to pain. Pain, 152(3), S90–S98.

Moseley, G. L. (2008). I can’t find it! Distorted body image and tactile dysfunction in patients with chronic back pain. Pain, 140(1), 239–243.

Proske, U., & Gandevia, S. C. (2012). The proprioceptive senses: Their roles in signaling body shape, body position and movement. Physiological Reviews, 92(4), 1651–1697.