There is a lot to consider when evaluating a new customer.
Their unique injury history (past and present), goal(s), training experience, time constraints, equipment availability, and even their favorite 90s teen TV drama (if not Party of Five we can’t be friends)…
…everything is taken into account and cross-referenced with my educational background and experience to ascertain, to the best of my ability, what the best course of action will be to get that individual from Ato Point B, that is to make it as efficient and safe as possible.
Evaluation, at least from my perspective, is a combination of muscle testing, motion monitors, desk work, and well-intentioned investigative work to see if anything shakes loose or if there are “red flags.”
But most importantly, the evaluation is a wonderful opportunity to set the tone, prove to someone that they are not “broken” and help them find TRAINED MENU.
In short, I often joke that my assessment can be described as follows:
“Can the one standing before me do things?”
There’s only so much muscle testing, desk work, range of motion testing, and “hmmmms” and “ahhhhs” that any person can tolerate before they want to jump through a window.
To that end, I prefer to make my assessments more palatable, involving the person standing/sitting in front of me more in the process and giving the “façade” (for lack of a better term) that they are being taken through a pseudo-training.
By making him move during his evaluation, I accomplish a few things:
1) I don’t find it creepy to just stare at them for 60 minutes and stroke my beard (even though I don’t have one).
2) I get more information about their ability to move, what compensation patterns (if any) exist, and whether or not certain positions (or loads) aggravate their symptoms.
Active vs. Passive Evaluation
A simple way to do all of the above is to differentiate one’s ability to actively perform a particular movement pattern and to do it passively.
My colleague, Luke Worthington, who is my co-host on Strategic Force Laboratorystates things very succinctly:
“What can THESE do?” = Active Evaluation
“What can I do? FOR them?” = Passive evaluation.
Let’s take the squat as an example.
When you watch someone perform a normal bodyweight (or loaded) squat, you’re bound to see a number of things go wrong.
Don’t get me wrong, it isn’t always a shit show.
Every once in a while I’ll work with someone for the first time, they’ll show off a well-executed squat, and I’ll burst into tears like the first time I saw their series finale Andor.
However, if I’m honest, that doesn’t happen often.
Generally speaking there is always something weird or noisy whenever I see someone squat
Nobody is perfect.
But at this point, I think it is imperative to distinguish between one’s ACTIVE ability to do something and one’s PASSIVE ability to do it.
Watch someone squat and you’re likely to see any of the following (if not a combination):
- Knee valgus
- Excessive rounding of the spine
- Excessive pronation of the legs
- Loss of balance
- Perceived lack of depth (<— which is arbitrary, but if there's a lot of 'trying' to get to a certain depth, or it's very, very shallow, then that's important to note).
And when we see any of the above, we have a nasty habit of assuming that the person in question is dysfunctional, and then end up remedially training them to death.
Fast forward three months (and a hip mobility and ankle dorsiflexion exercises) and there has been little, if any, improvement.
To repeat: Watch someone squat (actively).
This will give you a ton of information.
But don’t stop there. especially if you find they have a problem with it.
You should also try them PASSIVES.
Often when you add that extra layer of evaluation, in a way that is less aggressive and provides a bit more stability to the system – FYI: HEREIt’s another way to do it on a quadruped – you’ll find that they BOX do what you ask them to do.
Why is this important?
In the video above I walk my training partner, Justin, through a basic (passive) hip clean/flex screen. If he was a client, this would be followed by an active squat assessment.
I would like to see if his ACTIVE motion (doing the work) matched the PASSIVE (doing the work). From there I would like to compare the gap between the two.
I want this gap to be as small as possible.
If his active squat was poor, but I passively reassessed it and saw an improvement – ie that he was actually able to access more ROM – then I can pretty confidently assume that he doesn’t have a micro-penis It’s probably not dealing with something more serious, like a bone block or a muscle problem.
In this scenario I can do my job as a coach.
I can apply the appropriate “fixes” and/or practice progressions/regressions to help him learn to squat.
His body has shown me that he can do it passively, so I have to show him how to do it actively.
If, however, there was no improvement during passive testing, then:
It’s not my job.
1) I would still work within my means and train him in the ROM that is painless and that he can control.
2) However, I would also like to refer for more diagnostic tests or manual therapy to compliment his iron work.
Take home points
- Assessment should not be used as a tool to point out every…single…dysfunction someone has.
- Furthermore, what actively appears as “dysfunctional” may simply be the body engaging the emergency brakes.
- See also PASSIVE motion.
- Try to reduce the gap between active and passive ROM.
- If there is more ROM passively then do what you do best…coach!
- If ROM is poor (or there is pain) actively AND passively, you may want to consider referral.
- I don’t know, it could just be me, but Groutfits make my butt look amazing.
