## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \begin{tabular}{c} **(I)** \\ **Solution** \\ **Type** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **(J)** \\ **Solution** \\ **Type** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **(I-J)** \\ **Time** \\ \end{tabular} & **Std. Error** & **Sig.** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **95\% Lower** \\ **Bound** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **95\% Upper** \\ **Bound** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Water & Red\_Wine & \(-1.4294\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(-1.6139\) & \(-1.2449\) \\ \hline  & Black\_Tea & \(-2.6541\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(-2.8387\) & \(-2.4696\) \\ \hline  & Coffee & \(-0.1647\) & \(0.06379\) & \(0.118\) & \(-0.3492\) & \(0.0198\) \\ \hline  & Coke® & \(-0.1606\) & \(0.06379\) & \(0.140\) & \(-0.3451\) & \(0.0239\) \\ \hline Red\_Wine & Water & \(1.4294\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(1.2449\) & \(1.6139\) \\ \hline  & Black\_Tea & \(-1.2247\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(-1.4093\) & \(-1.0402\) \\ \hline  & Coffee & \(1.2647\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(1.0801\) & \(1.4492\) \\ \hline  & Coke® & \(1.2688\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(1.0843\) & \(1.4533\) \\ \hline Black\_Tea & Water & \(2.6541\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(2.4696\) & \(2.8387\) \\ \hline  & Red\_Wine & \(1.2247\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(1.0402\) & \(1.4093\) \\ \hline  & Coffee & \(2.4894\)\({}^{*}\) & \(0.06379\) & \(<\)0.001 & \(2.3049\) & \(2.6739\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Bonferroni test based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square (Error) = 0.037. Figure 7: Estimated \(\Delta\)E means of all materials (H: heat-polymerized resin; T: 3D PMMA resin; S: Urethane-based resin) in coffee. Black tea's effect was significantly (\(p<0.05\)) different to that of the red wine. These two solutions affected all materials in all time periods at a statistically significant level. The other three solutions had a uniform behavior, with much lower values in all materials (Figure 9). Generally, black tea was by far the most staining solution for all denture base resin materials tested. Figure 10 depicts a representative photograph of specimens from all groups at the 30-day period. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \begin{tabular}{c} **(I)** \\ **Solution** \\ **Type** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **(J)** \\ **Solution** \\ **Type** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **(I-J)** \\ **Type** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **Std. Error** \\ **\end{tabular}  & \ \begin{tabular}{c} **Sig.** \\ **Bound** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **95\% Lower** \\ **Bound** \\ \end{tabular}  \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Coffee} & \multirow{3}{*}{Water} & \(0.1647\) & \(0.06379\) & \(0.118\) & \(-0.0198\) & \(0.3492\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & & Red\_Wine & \(-1.2647\) * & \(0.06379\) & \(0.001\) & \(-1.4492\) & \(-1.0801\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & & Black\_Tea & \(-2.4894\) * & \(0.06379\) & \(0.001\) & \(-2.6739\) & \(-2.3049\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & & Coke\({}^{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\circled{\c{\ddots  
The soft resin showed the highest values of \(\Delta\)E in almost all immersions, in all solutions, in all time periods. In particular, for the 30-day period, there were statistically significant (\(p<0.05\)) differences as compared with the other two materials.