In many work environments, professionals perform physically demanding routines involving repetitive movements and prolonged static postures, increasing exposure to biomechanical risk factors associated with work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs). Wearable technologies offer opportunities for continuous posture monitoring and real-time feedback, but their occupational deployment remains challenging due to limitations related to comfort, durability, energy autonomy, and integration with work clothing. This scoping review aims to synthesize and critically analyze the existing evidence on smart-textile-based wearable systems for occupational posture monitoring. Following the PRISMA-ScR framework, a systematic search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and CINAHL was conducted, identifying 566 records. After screening and eligibility assessment, 34 studies were included in the final synthesis. The included studies were analyzed according to wearable architectures, sensing technologies, data processing and posture recognition, user feedback mechanisms, and energy management strategies. Hybrid architectures combining textile-based sensors and inertial measurement units, together with machine learning and real-time feedback, emerged as promising approaches for continuous posture monitoring. However, the evidence was predominantly based on technical or laboratory validation, with relatively small samples and limited long-term evaluation in real occupational environments. Five studies reported changes in posture or ergonomic behavior following the use of the technology, while no direct evidence of reductions in WRMSD incidence or severity was identified. Overall, the findings demonstrate substantial technological potential for smart-textile-based posture monitoring, but current evidence is insufficient to establish clinical or occupational effectiveness in preventing WRMSDs. Future research should prioritize prospective, long-term validation involving larger and more diverse worker populations under real-world occupational conditions, while addressing comfort, durability, energy autonomy, and compatibility with occupational clothing and personal protective equipment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peixoto et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: