BACKGROUND: Bleeding is an intraoperative and postoperative complication of liver surgery of concern, and yet evidence to support utility and reproducibility of bleeding scales for liver surgery is limited. We determined the reproducibility of the clinician-reported validated intraoperative bleeding severity scale and its clinical value of implementation in liver surgery. METHODS: In this descriptive and observational multicenter study, we assessed the performance of liver surgeons instructed on the clinician-reported intraoperative bleeding severity scale using training videos that covered all 5 grades of bleeding severity. Surgeons were stratified according to years of surgical experience and number of surgeries performed per year based on a median split in low and high values. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement was assessed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall's W). RESULTS: Forty-seven surgeons from 10 hospitals in Spain participated in the study. The overall intraobserver concordance was 0.985, and the overall interobserver concordance was 0.929. For "high experience" surgeons, the intraobserver and interobserver agreement values were 0.990 and 0.941, respectively. For "low experience" surgeons, the intraobserver and interobserver agreement was 0.981 and 0.922, respectively. Regarding the annual number of surgeries, intraobserver and interobserver agreement values were 0.995 and 0.940, respectively, for surgeons performing >35 surgeries per year, with 0.979 and 0.923, respectively, for surgeons who perform ≤35 surgeries year. CONCLUSION: The clinician-reported intraoperative bleeding severity scale shows high interobserver and intraobserver concordance, suggesting it is a useful tool for assessing severity of bleeding during liver surgery; years of surgical experience and number of annual procedures performed did not affect the applicability of the clinician-reported intraoperative bleeding severity scale.