Introduction: Adverse events are common and are responsible for a significant burden in the healthcare setting. Such issues can vary according to the local culture and relevant policies. The current literature on the subject primarily addresses Anglo-Saxon cultures; this study focused on understanding the perception of disclosure in a middle-income country in Latin America.
Methods: In this descriptive study conducted from June-August, 2021, an online self-administered survey about disclosure practice used a convenience sample of 995 Brazilian healthcare professionals.
Results: Based on two different outcomes presented following a hypothetical adverse event (outcome 1: death; outcome 2: no permanent damage), 77.9% of participants fully agree that disclosure should be performed in both scenarios. Although 67.1% claimed that disclosure changes the perception of the institution by those involved, only 8.3% fully agree that there would be a reduction in trust regarding the institution. Despite only 11.5% of participants fully agreeing that disclosure increases the chance of legal action against professionals and institutions, 92.7% fully or partially agree that judicialization was possible in scenario 1, and 72.4% agree it was possible in scenario 2. Of the participants, 64.2% claimed they already faced a "disclosure" situation, and 44.3% fully believe that the person directly involved in the adverse event should participate in the disclosure.
Conclusion: In this sample of professionals from a middle-income country in Latin America, the practice of disclosure was considered ethical, and the majority of respondents affirmed that it should always be performed. Nonetheless, this call for transparency collides with participants' perception of a higher risk of legal action when disclosure is performed after a negative outcome situation.
Keywords: adverse events; disclosure; legalization.