Ethnographic methods are widely used for understanding situated practices with technology. When authors present their data gathering methods, they almost invariably focus on the bare essentials. These enable the reader to comprehend what was done, but leave the impression that setting up and conducting the study was straightforward. Text books present generic advice, but rarely focus on specific study contexts. In this paper, we focus on lessons learnt by non-clinical researchers studying technology use in hospitals: gaining access; developing good relations with clinicians and patients; being outsiders in healthcare settings; and managing the cultural divide between technology human factors and clinical practice.Drawing on case studies across various hospital settings, we present a repertoire of ways of working with people and technologies in these settings. These include engaging clinicians and patients effectively, taking an iterative approach to data gathering and being responsive to the demands and opportunities provided by the situation. The main contribution of this paper is to make visible many of the lessons we have learnt in conducting technology studies in healthcare, using these lessons to present strategies that other researchers can take up.

There have been few studies on how analysts learn or use frameworks to support gathering and analysis of field data. Distributed Cognition for Teamwork (DiCoT) is a framework that has been developed to facilitate the learning of Distributed Cognition (DCog), focusing on analysing small team interactions. DiCoT, in turn, exploits representations from Contextual Inquiry (CI). The present study is a reflective account of the experience of learning first CI and then DiCoT for studying the use of infusion devices in operating theatres. We report on how each framework supported a novice analyst (the first author) in structuring his data gathering and analysis, and the challenges that he faced. There are three contributions of this work: (1) an example of learning CI and DCog in a semistructured way; (2) an account of the process and outcomes of learning and using CI and DiCoT in a complex setting; and (3) an outline account of information flow in anaesthesia. While CI was easier to learn and consequently gave better initial support to the novice analyst entering a complex work setting, DiCoT gave added value through its focus on information propagation and transformation as well as the roles of people and artefacts in supporting communication and situation awareness. This study makes visible many of the challenges of learning to apply a framework that are commonly encountered but rarely reported.