Who says you can't monitor all of the people all of the time?

There is a growing trend in the widespread use of smart wearables to monitor a range of workplace hazards but as a December ’25 article from RoSPA points out⁽¹⁾, while the use of new digital technologies in the workplace can benefit occupational safety and health (OSH) in many ways, they can also bring new challenges if not implemented correctly. Studies have found they can improve OSH compliance, identify training needs, and prevent accidents and injuries through the use of real-time data which enables better-informed decision-making by managers and workers. However, the research has also shown that for instance, that wearable devices that are uncomfortable for the wearer and not a proper fit can lead to non-compliance. Workers can also become over-reliant on automated warnings instead of maintaining situational awareness and attention. This is significant because these devices are not foolproof, they can suffer technical glitches meaning data collected through them may sometimes be inaccurate. In addition, frequent warning alerts could cause ‘warning fatigue,’ leading wearers to miss critical safety notifications.

Measuring versus monitoring

Smart wearables also blur the lines between monitoring and traditional measurement technology such as sound level meters and personal noise dosimeters. One wrist-borne device boasts a noise monitoring capability for “loud sounds”, yes, I did a double take too; noise monitoring on the wrist?

In order to obtain a risk assessment, the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) state⁽²⁾, “the Noise Regulations require you to make measurements of noise ‘if necessary’; measurements will be necessary if you cannot find reliable noise information from other sources”. And if you do take measurements, the Regulations also state that instrumentation used should be to a relevant sound level meter or noise dosimeter standard, the latter being the ‘original’ piece of health & safety related wearable technology, a concept dating back over 60 years.

Indeed, there has just been an amendment to the IEC dosimeter standard⁽³⁾ with the ‘BS EN’ version being published in December, the most relevant changes in this context being specifications for directional response along with detailed requirements for pattern-evaluation tests and periodic testing.  The former is important because a personal noise dosimeter is worn on the shoulder close to the ear (not on the wrist) and must be omnidirectional and the latter, where legal metrology requires that they fully comply to the standard before being placed on the market, such as is the case in Spain⁽⁴⁾.

Measurements are certainly necessary if you want to correctly specify hearing protection as per the HSE’s CUFF acronym; condition, use, fit and fit for purpose a methodology Specialist Inspector, Chris Steele encouraged UKHCA members to adopt during his recent conference presentation⁽⁶⁾. Ideally, you should use the octave band method, a measurement feature that is found on many sound level meters and some ‘top specification’ noise dosimeters.  But look out for noise dosimeters that as an alternative have a ‘C-A’ measurement as an indicator of low frequency content (where hearing protection tends to be less effective) which means that you can use the H-M-L technique rather than the least accurate SNR method that only requires a C-weighted value. The HSE have a very handy calculator for all three alternative methods⁽⁶⁾.

More of the people, more of the time.

Another standard revised this year is ISO 9612 7, that marks the 20th anniversary of the implementation of the Control of Noise at Work Regulations.  Some of the key changes are directly relevant to the deployment of noise dosimetry namely:-

• Reshaping of the requirements for the task based method such as a minimum number of workers to involve, depending on the total numbers of workers making the method more robust
• Additional requirements on the duration of samples for the job based strategy in order to make the method more robust
• A final validation check on the results of the full day measurement method, comparable with the validation criterion for the job based method present in the current revision which it replaces
• Guidance on how to assess the exposure of a more flexible workforce

It is understood that HSE may revise its L108 Guidance to reflect ISO 9612 along with changes to EN458 relating to the selection, use and care of hearing protection due for publication in early 2026.

Game changer

While there is an inexorable rise in the adoption of wearable technology in the workplace, noise dosimetry remains the most valid method for accurate, easily accessible data especially when looking at task based and/or full day measurements.  A reducing price point means that you can gain actionable insights across a bigger representative sample in sectors where exposure is more difficult to assess risk.

References
1.    RoSPA- Smart wearables for workplace safety
2.    Controlling noise at work: The Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005, Guidance on Regulations.  HSE Document L108
3.    IEC 61252:2025 | IEC
4.    BOE-A-2007-17278 Order ITC/2845/2007, of 25 September, which regulates the metrological control of the State of instruments intended for the measurement of audible sound and acoustic calibrators.
5.    HSE Update on Workplace Noise, UKHCA Conference, Manchester, 6th November 2025
6.    Exposure calculators and ready-reckoners - HSE
7.    ISO 9612:2025 Acoustics — Determination of occupational noise exposure — Methodology