Abstract: Objective: To translate the Measure of Moral Distress Healthcare Professionals (MMD-HP) and test the Chinese version of the MMD-HP, aiming to provide an evaluation tool for measure of moral distress for health-care professionals. Methods: A modified version of the Brislin translation model was used for cross-cultural adaption through expert consultation and pre-surveys. A total of 967 physicians and nurses were recruited using convenience sampling from September, 2023 to February, 2024 to test the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of MMD-HP. Results: The Chinese version of MMD-HP contained 4 dimensions and 27 items with 9 items of system level, 6 items of the patient level, 5 items of the colleague-related team level, and 7 items of the patient-related team level. The exploratory factor analysis revealed 4 common factors with a cumulative variance contribution of 58.373%. The Cronbach's α coefficient of each dimension ranged from 0.759 to 0.891, the Cronbach's α coefficient of the total scale was 0.936, the re-test reliability was 0.811, and the index of content validity was 0.980. The criterion-related validity were 0.884 and 0.818 with the Chinese version of the Moral Dilemma Scale for adult unit nurses and the Chinese Version of the Revised Moral Distress Scale for paediatric nurses. Conclusion: The Chinese version of the MMD-HP demonstrates sound reliability and validity. It can be used for assessing the moral dilemmas of healthcare professionals in China.

Key words: moral distress; scale; credibility; validity