To gather information on the (a) types of wearable sensors, particularly personal activity monitors, currently used by occupational safety and health (OSH) professionals; (b) potential benefits of using such technologies in the workplace; and (c) perceived barriers preventing the widespread adoption of wearable sensors in industry.
Background:
Wearable sensors are increasingly being promoted as a means to improve employee health and well-being, and there is mounting evidence supporting their use as exposure assessment and personal health tools. Despite this, many workplaces have been hesitant to adopt these technologies.
Methods:
An electronic survey was emailed to 28,428 registered members of the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) and 1,302 professionals certified by the Board of Certification in Professional Ergonomics (BCPE).
Results:
A total of 952 valid responses were returned. Over half of respondents described being in favor of using wearable sensors to track OSH-related risk factors and relevant exposure metrics at their respective workplaces. However, barriers including concerns regarding employee privacy/confidentiality of collected data, employee compliance, sensor durability, the cost/benefit ratio of using wearables, and good manufacturing practice requirements were described as challenges precluding adoption.
Conclusion:
The broad adoption of wearable technologies appears to depend largely on the scientific community’s ability to successfully address the identified barriers.
Application:
Investigators may use the information provided to develop research studies that better address OSH practitioner concerns and help technology developers operationalize wearable sensors to improve employee health and well-being.
AmftO.TrösterG. (2008). Recognition of dietary activity events using on-body sensors. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 42(2), 121–136.
2.
AmickR. Z.ChaparroA.PattersonJ. A.JorgensenM. J. (2015). Test-retest reliability of the sway balance mobile application. Journal of Mobile Technology in Medicine, 4(2), 40–47.
3.
AngerW. K.ElliotD. L.BodnerT.OlsonR.RohlmanD. S.TruxilloD. M.. . . MontgomeryD. (2015). Effectiveness of total worker health interventions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(2), 226–247.
4.
AppelboomG.CamachoE.AbrahamM. E.BruceS. S.DumontE. L.ZachariaB. E.. . . ConnollyE. S. (2014). Smart wearable body sensors for patient self-assessment and monitoring. Archives of Public Health, 72(1), 28.
5.
AriasO. E.Caban-MartinezA. J.UmukoroP. E.OkechukwuC. A.DennerleinJ. T. (2015). Physical activity levels at work and outside of work among commercial construction workers. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 57(1), 73–78.
6.
BoissyP.Diop-FallouS.LebelK.BernierM.BalgF.Tousignant-LaflammeY. (2017). Trueness and minimal detectable change of smartphone inclinometer measurements of shoulder range of motion. Telemedicine and e-Health, 23(6), 503–506.
7.
BonatoP. (2010). Wearable sensors and systems. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 29(3), 25–36.
8.
BoschT.van EckJ.KnitelK.de LoozeM. (2016). The effects of a passive exoskeleton on muscle activity, discomfort and endurance time in forward bending work. Applied Ergonomics, 54, 212–217.
9.
Cadmus-BertramL. A.MarcusB. H.PattersonR. E.ParkerB. A.MoreyB. L. (2015). Randomized trial of a Fitbit-based physical activity intervention for women. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 49(3), 414–418.
10.
ChenS.LachJ.LoB.YangG.-Z. (2016). Toward pervasive gait analysis with wearable sensors: A systematic review. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, 20(6), 1521–1537.
11.
ChoiB.HwangS.LeeS. (2017). What drives construction workers’ acceptance of wearable technologies in the workplace? Indoor localization and wearable health devices for occupational safety and health. Automation in Construction, 84, 31–41.
12.
CookD. J.CrandallA.SinglaG.ThomasB. (2010). Detection of social interaction in smart spaces. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 41(2), 90–104.
13.
CuttiA. G.GiovanardiA.RocchiL.DavalliA.SacchettiR. (2008). Ambulatory measurement of shoulder and elbow kinematics through inertial and magnetic sensors. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, 46(2), 169–178.
14.
da CostaB. R.VieiraE. R. (2010). Risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review of recent longitudinal studies. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 53(3), 285–323.
15.
de LoozeM. P.BoschT.KrauseF.StadlerK. S.O’SullivanL. W. (2016). Exoskeletons for industrial application and their potential effects on physical work load. Ergonomics, 59, 671–681.
16.
de LoozeM. P.KrauseF.O’SullivanL. W. (2017). The potential and acceptance of exoskeletons in industry. In González-VargasJ.IbáñezJ.Contreras-VidalJ. L.van der KooijH.PonsJ. L. (Eds.), Wearable robotics: Challenges and trends (pp. 195–199). New York, NY: Springer.
17.
EagleN.PentlandA. S. (2006). Reality mining: Sensing complex social systems. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10(4), 255–268.
18.
El-GoharyM.McNamesJ. (2015). Human joint angle estimation with inertial sensors and validation with a robot arm. Biomedical Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 62(7), 1759–1767.
19.
EvensonK. R.GotoM. M.FurbergR. D. (2015). Systematic review of the validity and reliability of consumer-wearable activity trackers. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12(1), 159.
20.
FaberG.ChangC.KingmaI.DennerleinJ.van DieënJ. (2016). Estimating 3D L5/S1 moments and ground reaction forces during trunk bending using a full-body ambulatory inertial motion capture system. Journal of Biomechanics, 49(6), 904–912.
21.
GargA.KapelluschJ. M. (2009). Applications of biomechanics for prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Ergonomics, 52(1), 36–59.
22.
HallmanD. M.Birk JørgensenM.HoltermannA. (2017). Objectively measured physical activity and 12-month trajectories of neck-shoulder pain in workers: A prospective study in DPHACTO. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 45(3), 288–298.
23.
JakicicJ. M.DavisK. K.RogersR. J.KingW. C.MarcusM. D.HelselD.. . . BelleS. H. (2016). Effect of wearable technology combined with a lifestyle intervention on long-term weight loss: The IDEA randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 316(11), 1161–1171.
24.
JangK. I.JungH. N.LeeJ. W.XuS.LiuY. H.MaY.. . . RogersJ. A. (2016). Ferromagnetic, folded electrode composite as a soft interface to the skin for long-term electrophysiological recording. Advanced Functional Materials, 26(40), 7281–7290.
25.
JunkerH.AmftO.LukowiczP.TrösterG. (2008). Gesture spotting with body-worn inertial sensors to detect user activities. Pattern Recognition, 41(6), 2010–2024.
26.
KaratsidisA.BellusciG.SchepersH. M.de ZeeM.AndersenM. S.VeltinkP. H. (2016). Estimation of ground reaction forces and moments during gait using only inertial motion capture. Sensors, 17(1), 75.
27.
KimS.NussbaumM. A. (2013). Performance evaluation of a wearable inertial motion capture system for capturing physical exposures during manual material handling tasks. Ergonomics, 56, 314–326.
28.
KimS.NussbaumM. A. (2014). An evaluation of classification algorithms for manual material handling tasks based on data obtained using wearable technologies. Ergonomics, 57, 1040–1051.
29.
KimS.NussbaumM. A.GabbardJ. L. (2016). Augmented reality “smart glasses” in the workplace: Industry perspectives and challenges for worker safety and health. IIE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, 4(4), 253–258.
30.
LebelK.BoissyP.NguyenH.DuvalC. (2017). Inertial measurement systems for segments and joints kinematics assessment: Towards an understanding of the variations in sensors accuracy. Biomedical Engineering Online, 16(1), 56.
31.
LidyniaC.BraunerP.ZiefleM. (2017). A step in the right direction—Understanding privacy concerns and perceived sensitivity of fitness trackers. In AhramT.FalcãoC. (Eds.), Advances in human factors in wearable technologies and game design (pp. 42–53). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
32.
LigorioG.ZanottoD.SabatiniA.AgrawalS. (2017). A novel functional calibration method for real-time elbow joint angles estimation with magnetic-inertial sensors. Journal of Biomechanics, 54, 106–110.
33.
MamanZ. S.YazdiM. A. A.CavuotoL. A.MegahedF. M. (2017). A data-driven approach to modeling physical fatigue in the workplace using wearable sensors. Applied Ergonomics, 65, 515–529.
34.
MarrasW. S.CutlipR. G.BurtS. E.WatersT. R. (2009). National occupational research agenda (NORA) future directions in occupational musculoskeletal disorder health research. Applied Ergonomics, 40, 15–22.
35.
McClearyK.GoetzelR. Z.RoemerE. C.BerkoJ.KentK.TorreH. (2017). Employer and employee opinions about workplace health promotion (wellness) programs: Results of the 2015 Harris poll Nielsen Survey. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 59(3), 256–263.
36.
McFarlandS.NguyenD. (2017). Analysis of potential glove-induced hand injury metrics during typical neutral buoyancy training operations. Paper presented at the 47th International Conference on Environmental Systems (ICES), Charleston, SC.
37.
MorrowM. M.LowndesB.FortuneE.KaufmanK. R.HallbeckS. (2017). Validation of inertial measurement units for upper body kinematics. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 33, 227–232.
38.
NathN. D.AkhavianR.BehzadanA. H. (2017). Ergonomic analysis of construction worker’s body postures using wearable mobile sensors. Applied Ergonomics, 62, 107–117.
39.
NorbergP. A.HorneD. R.HorneD. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: Personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126.
40.
OhlendorfD.SchwarzerM.ReyJ.HermannsI.NienhausA.EllegastR.. . . GronebergD. A. (2015). Medical work assessment in German hospitals: A study protocol of a movement sequence analysis (MAGRO-MSA). Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 10(1), 1.
41.
PageT. (2015). A forecast of the adoption of wearable technology. International Journal of Technology Diffusion, 6(2), 12–29.
42.
PatelS.McGinnisR. S.SilvaI.DiCristofaroS.MahadevanN.JortbergE.. . . GhaffariR. (2016). A wearable computing platform for developing cloud-based machine learning models for health monitoring applications. Paper presented at the 38th Annual International Conference of the Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).
43.
PatelS.ParkH.BonatoP.ChanL.RodgersM. (2012). A review of wearable sensors and systems with application in rehabilitation. Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation, 9(1), 21.
44.
PeppoloniL.FilippeschiA.RuffaldiE.AvizzanoC. (2016). A novel wearable system for the online assessment of risk for biomechanical load in repetitive efforts. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 52, 1–11.
45.
PicernoP. (2017). 25 years of lower limb joint kinematics by using inertial and magnetic sensors: A review of methodological approaches. Gait & Posture, 51, 239–246.
46.
PiwekL.EllisD. A.AndrewsS.JoinsonA. (2016). The rise of consumer health wearables: Promises and barriers. PLoS Medicine, 13(2), e1001953.
47.
PlodererB.ReitbergerW.Oinas-KukkonenH.van Gemert-PijnenJ. (2014). Social interaction and reflection for behaviour change. New York, NY: Springer.
48.
PrairieJ.CorbeilP. (2014). Paramedics on the job: Dynamic trunk motion assessment at the workplace. Applied Ergonomics, 45, 895–903.
49.
PwCP. (2017). The wearable life 2.0: Connected living in a wearable world. London: Author.
50.
ReidC. R.McFarlandS. M. (2015). Feasibility assessment of an extravehicular activity glove sensing platform to evaluate potential hand injury risk factors. Paper presented at the 45th International Conference on Environmental Systems (ICES), Bellevue, WA.
51.
ReidC. R.SchallM. C.JrAmickR. Z.SchiffmanJ. M.LuM.-L.SmetsM.. . . PortoR. (2017). Wearable technologies: How will we overcome barriers to enhance worker performance, health, and safety?Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 61st Annual Meeting (pp. 1026–1030). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
52.
Robert-LachaineX.MecheriH.LarueC.PlamondonA. (2017a). Accuracy and repeatability of single-pose calibration of inertial measurement units for whole-body motion analysis. Gait & Posture, 54, 80–86.
53.
Robert-LachaineX.MecheriH.LarueC.PlamondonA. (2017b). Validation of inertial measurement units with an optoelectronic system for whole-body motion analysis. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, 55, 609–619.
54.
SchallM. C.Jr.FethkeN. B.ChenH.OyamaS.DouphrateD. I. (2016). Accuracy and repeatability of an inertial measurement unit system for field-based occupational studies. Ergonomics, 59, 591–602.
55.
SchillA. L.ChosewoodL. C. (2013). The NIOSH Total Worker Health program: An overview. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 55, S8–S11.
SmithH. J.DinevT.XuH. (2011). Information privacy research: An interdisciplinary review. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 989–1016.
58.
StoppaM.ChiolerioA. (2014). Wearable electronics and smart textiles: A critical review. Sensors, 14(7), 11957–11992.
59.
TaoW.LiuT.ZhengR.FengH. (2012). Gait analysis using wearable sensors. Sensors, 12(2), 2255–2283.
60.
van RijnR. M.HuisstedeB. M. A.KoesB. W.BurdorfA. (2010). Associations between work-related factors and specific disorders of the shoulder—A systematic review of the literature. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 36(3), 189–201.
61.
VignaisN.MiezalM.BleserG.MuraK.GoreckyD.MarinF. (2013). Innovative system for real-time ergonomic feedback in industrial manufacturing. Applied Ergonomics, 44, 566–574.
62.
WiedenmaierS.OehmeO.SchmidtL.LuczakH. (2003). Augmented reality (AR) for assembly processes design and experimental evaluation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 16(3), 497–514.
63.
WuY.ChenK.FuC. (2016). Natural gesture modeling and recognition approach based on joint movements and arm orientations. IEEE Sensors Journal, 16(21), 7753–7761.
64.
YangL.GrootenW. J.ForsmanM. (2017). An iPhone application for upper arm posture and movement measurements. Applied Ergonomics, 65, 492–500.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
