. 2020 Dec 2;82(4):218–225. doi: 10.1007/s00056-020-00266-y

Table 4.

Multiple comparisons of mean values of force loss with regard to wire type

Mehrfachvergleiche der Mittelwerte der Kraftverluste in Abhängigkeit vom Drahttyp

(I) Type of wire	(J) Type of wire	Mean Difference (I−J) in %	Std. error	p-value	95% confidence interval
(I) Type of wire	(J) Type of wire	Mean Difference (I−J) in %	Std. error	p-value	Lower bound	Upper bound
SS	TMA‑C	−38.3^*	3.8	0.0001	−47.8	−28.9
SS	TMA-Low	−15.1^*	3.8	0.001	−24.5	−5.6
TMA‑C	SS	38.3^*	3.8	0.0001	28. 9	47.8
TMA‑C	TMA-Low	23.3^*	3.8	0.0001	13.8	32.7
TMA-Low	SS	15.1^*	3.8	0.001	5.6	24.5
TMA-Low	TMA‑C	−23.3^*	3.8	0.0001	−32.7	−13.8

*The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level

SS stainless steel archwire, TMA‑C conventional titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA) archwire, TMA-Low low-friction TMA archwire, Std. error standard error