What is the test for admitting or denying experimental evidence in a medical malpractice case?

The court acted within its discretion in excluding the evidence offered for this very narrow purpose. A party who seeks to introduce experimental evidence must show as foundational facts that the experiment was relevant, that it was conducted under conditions the same as or substantially similar to those of the actual occurrence, and that it will not consume undue time, confuse the issues, or mislead the jury [citation]. [Citation.] The party need not, however, show that the conditions were absolutely identical. [Citations.] Under Evidence Code section 352, the trial court has wide [51 Cal.4th 376] discretion to admit or reject experimental evidence. We reverse decisions to admit or exclude such evidence only when the trial court has clearly abused its discretion.

[247 P.3d 106]

( People v. Boyd, supra, 222 Cal.App.3d at pp. 565566, 271 Cal.Rptr. 738.)