Back to Article
The Effectiveness of Wearable Technology on Improving Safety and Health Monitoring of Construction Workers in Nigeria
World Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture
| Vol 4, Issue 1
Table 2. 6%), despite 64.6% reporting they received training.Participation in safety drills was very low (9.7%). Overall, wearabletechnology use was limited, with about two-thirds (65.9%) not using it, andonly a small proportion (18.6%) reporting frequent use for safety and healthmonitoring. Table 2Table 2. Awareness of Wearable Technology for Healthand Safety Monitoring among Construction Workers
| Parameters | Frequency (N = 370) | Percentage (%) |
| Aware of wearable technology | ||
| Aware of wearable technology for health and safety monitoring in construction | ||
| Low awareness | 250 | 67.6 |
| High awareness | 120 | 32.4 |
| Receiving sufficient training on how to use wearable safety technologies (e.g., smart helmets, fall detection devices) | ||
| No | 131 | 35.4 |
| Yes | 239 | 64.6 |
| Participation in safety drills or training on your construction site | ||
| Participated | 36 | 9.7 |
| Not participated | 334 | 90.3 |
| The Use of Wearable Technology | ||
| Overall utilisation of wearable Technology (3-item scale) | ||
| Not Used | 244 | 65.9 |
| Used | 126 | 34.1 |
| Personally used wearable technology for health and safety monitoring at work | ||
| No | 244 | 65.9 |
| Yes | 126 | 34.1 |
| Frequently use wearable technology for safety and health monitoring | ||
| No | 301 | 81.4 |
| Yes | 69 | 18.6 |
| Frequently use wearable technology devices at work | ||
| No | 238 | 64.3 |
| Yes | 132 | 35.7 |