Through our on-site physio programs, we often work with worker’s to provide tailored exercise plans to build up their strength. And our data shows that stronger people are far less likely to get injured.

Another notable trend is the significant investment by governments and large firms into the underpinning technologies that make wearables possible. Around the world, public and private sectors are funding R&D in sensors, battery technology, and materials science. The dual aim is to drive innovation that can tackle large-scale health challenges (like chronic disease management) and to develop valuable intellectual property that can be licensed to device manufacturers. In short, many countries see wearables as a strategic tool – both for improving public health outcomes and for economic opportunity in the tech sector.

The excitement around wearables is ultimately rooted in urgent health and demographic trends. Across Australia, New Zealand, and globally, organizations face similar challenges: an aging population, a rise in chronic diseases, and the high costs associated with both. Healthcare expenditures are surging – for instance, in the United States, roughly 90% of the nation’s $4.9 trillion annual healthcare spend is for people with chronic health conditions [4]. Chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, and others now cause about 7 in 10 deaths in the U.S. [5]. Australia and New Zealand mirror these issues with escalating rates of preventable chronic illness, which drive up insurance and workers’ compensation costs. There is also a growing consumer demand for personalized medicine – people want tailored wellness insights and preventive care, not one-size-fits-all solutions. Together, these factors create a strong impetus for wearable technology: if used wisely, wearables have potential to help monitor health, catch early warning signs, and reduce the burden of chronic disease. This promise is why governments, healthcare providers, and employers are all paying close attention to wearables as part of the solution.

Notably, the corporate world has begun embracing wearables to improve employee health and productivity. Many employers see value in encouraging healthier lifestyles and proactive health monitoring. In fact, half of U.S. employers now provide fitness wearables to their employees as part of wellness programs [6]. This trend is driven by clear benefits: when employees engage in wellness initiatives (like step challenges or monitoring their sleep and activity), companies often see fewer sick days, higher productivity, and even lower healthcare premiums over time. Employees, for their part, have been receptive – nearly 45% of Americans are already tracking their personal health or fitness via a smartwatch or fitness band [7]. In our experience, industries ranging from food manufacturing and warehousing to corporate offices and pharmaceuticals are experimenting with wearables. The applications vary – from monitoring physical strain and fatigue in manual labor jobs, to promoting movement and better posture in sedentary office roles – but the end goal is the same: healthier, safer, and more engaged employees.

A recurring theme is the trade-off between continuous, data-rich monitoring and power consumption. Collecting a wealth of real-time data – for example, streaming multiple metrics like heart rate variability (HRV), heart rate, and blood oxygen (SpO₂) from a single small device – is extremely power-hungry. Yet users and workplaces alike prefer devices that are small and non-intrusive, which inherently limits battery size. This tension often forces compromises: either a device is made larger/bulkier to house a bigger battery, or it captures fewer variables to preserve battery life, or it requires more frequent charging. Improving battery efficiency is critical for next-gen wearables.

Wearable makers are in a constant push to refine their sensor technology to match the accuracy of gold-standard medical or industrial instruments. Today’s wearables can measure many things – heart rhythms, oxygen saturation, stress levels, movement patterns, and more – but not all of these measurements are fully reliable or diagnostic-grade yet. The gap is closing, but it’s still there for many metrics. Accuracy matters because in a workplace setting, false alarms or incorrect data can erode trust in the device.

One of the main barriers to long-term adoption of wearables is simply whether people like wearing them. Device form factor – the size, weight, and comfort of a wearable – hugely influences user compliance. Many current wearables (especially industrial or medical devices) are still fairly bulky or awkward for continuous wear. If a device irritates the skin, gets in the way of manual work, or just feels like a nuisance, employees will eventually stop using it.

For wearable solutions to be adopted at scale, the unit cost and total cost of ownership must come down. Outfitting a workforce of 500 or 1,000 people with devices – and maintaining the data infrastructure – can be a major expense. As long as hardware prices and ongoing subscription fees remain high, cost will be a barrier to entry. From the buyer’s perspective, it’s essential to calculate ROI.