. 2023 Dec 5;23:966. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03710-8

Table 2.

Means, SD, and SE of the change in microhardness values (Δ VHN) for each type of dental resin composite after being subjected to different beverages used in the study with/without brushing regarding the effect of different types of dental resin composites

Material	Group	Beverages	Mean	SD	SE	p-value
Admira fusion	Non-Brushing	Artificial saliva (Control)	-2.60^c	1.67	.75	0.00*
		Nescafe Classic	-5.20^b	.84	.37
		Red wine	-8.20^a	.84	.37
		Pepsi Cola	-9.50^a	.61	.27
	Brushing	Artificial saliva (Control)	-10.60^b	.89	.40	0.00*
		Nescafe Classic	-10.20^b	.67	.30
		Red wine	-12.70^a	.57	.25
		Pepsi Cola	-11.90^a	.74	.33
Grandio	Non-Brushing	Artificial saliva (Control)	-5.60^c	2.41	1.08	0.00*
		Nescafe Classic	-9.70^b	.97	.44
		Red wine	-16.40^a	1.52	.68
		Pepsi Cola	-15.90^a	1.75	.78
	Brushing	Artificial saliva (Control)	-10.20^c	.84	.37	0.00*
		Nescafe Classic	-13.30^b	1.20	.54
		Red wine	-6.00^d	.79	.35
		Pepsi Cola	-15.20^a	.67	.30

Significance level P < 0.05, *significant

Tukey’s post hoc test: means sharing the same superscript letters are not significantly different