Skip to main content

Table 2 Intergroup comparison of fracture resistance (Dunnett test)

From: Effect of MTA versus CEM apical plugs on fracture resistance of endodontically treated simulated immature teeth restored with cast metal posts: an in-vitro study

(I) group

(J) group

Mean difference (I–J)

Std. error

Sig

95% confidence interval

Lower bound

Upper bound

Control

MTA3

− 522.8000

181.7915

.125

− 1149.867

104.267

CEM3

− 676.7250

251.6855

.145

− 1500.674

147.224

MTA5

− 1334.3125*

278.0990

.003

− 2254.889

− 413.736

CEM5

− 618.1375

208.2943

.089

− 1302.462

66.187

MTA5

MTA3

811.5125

239.4601

.066

− 44.383

1667.408

CEM3

657.5875

296.0381

.313

− 311.419

1626.594

control

1334.3125*

278.0990

.003

413.736

2254.889

CEM5

716.1750

260.1528

.144

− 165.501

1597.851

CEM5

MTA3

95.3375

152.9332

.999

− 418.494

609.169

CEM3

− 58.5875

231.7024

1.000

− 830.257

713.082

control

618.1375

208.2943

.089

− 66.187

1302.462

MTA5

− 716.1750

260.1528

.144

− 1597.851

165.501

MTA3

CEM3

− 153.9250

208.2010

.995

− 885.770

577.920

control

522.8000

181.7915

.125

− 104.267

1149.867

MTA5

− 811.5125

239.4601

.066

− 1667.408

44.383

CEM5

− 95.3375

152.9332

.999

− 609.169

418.494

CEM3

MTA3

153.9250

208.2010

.995

− 577.920

885.770

control

676.7250

251.6855

.145

− 147.224

1500.674

MTA5

− 657.5875

296.0381

.313

− 1626.594

311.419

CEM5

58.5875

231.7024

1.000

− 713.082

830.257

  1. *The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level