## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline
**Time of Use** & **Sterilization Cycles** & \(n\) & **Mean** & **SD** & **Minimum** & **Maximum** & **Fracture Length** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{0 s} & 0 a & 10 & 1176.35 & 225.32 & 766.00 & 1414.00 & 3.06 \\  & 1 a & 10 & 1259.40 & 162.90 & 989.50 & 1500.00 & 3.10 \\  & 5 a & 10 & 1120.85 & 156.52 & 820.50 & 1316.50 & 3.17 \\  & 10 a & 10 & 1176.44 & 164.09 & 911.35 & 1384.50 & 3.04 \\  & 0 b & 10 & 977.90 & 227.76 & 564.00 & 1214.50 & 3.13 \\  & 1 b & 10 & 954.80 & 157.00 & 684.00 & 1174.50 & 3.06 \\  & 5 b & 10 & 913.30 & 144.78 & 662.50 & 1080.00 & 3.01 \\  & 10 b & 10 & 955.80 & 148.54 & 729.50 & 1171.50 & 3.04 \\  & 0 c & 10 & 442.96 & 61.98 & 309.10 & 512.00 & 3.11 \\  & 1 c & 10 & 404.26 & 48.51 & 309.55 & 464.35 & 3.08 \\  & 5 c & 10 & 431.98 & 48.33 & 360.80 & 510.00 & 2.99 \\  & 10 c & 10 & 488.12 & 51.96 & 410.45 & 605.50 & 3.02 \\ \hline \end{tabular} a  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Descriptive statistics of the number of cycles to failure of the time of use and the sterilization cycles study groups. Figure 5: Box plot of the number of cycles to failure for the time of use and the sterilization cycles study groups. The horizontal line in each box represents the median value. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline
**Study Group** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Weibull Shape (\(\beta\))**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Weibull Scale (n)**} \\ \hline  & **Estimate** & **St Error** & **Lower** & **Upper** & **Estimate** & **St Error** & **Lower** & **Upper** \\ \hline
0 s & 8.3142 & 1.0833 & 6.4404 & 10.7332 & 248.5615 & 4.9655 & 239.0173 & 258.4868 \\
60 s & 6.8989 & 0.8808 & 5.3716 & 8.8603 & 203.9091 & 4.9179 & 194.4944 & 213.7794 \\
120 s & 8.0777 & 0.9119 & 6.4743 & 10.0782 & 93.5190 & 1.9349 & 89.8025 & 97.3892 \\
0 cycles & 2.7040 & 0.4074 & 2.0127 & 3.6328 & 195.6014 & 13.9108 & 170.1516 & 224.8576 \\
1 cycle & 2.6640 & 0.4060 & 1.9761 & 3.5913 & 192.7207 & 13.8859 & 167.3392 & 221.9521 \\
5 cycles & 2.9873 & 0.4529 & 2.2195 & 4.0208 & 185.5872 & 11.9333 & 163.6121 & 210.5138 \\
10 cycles & 3.1770 & 0.4761 & 2.3685 & 4.2617 & 195.9868 & 11.8612 & 174.0652 & 220.6693 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Weibull statistics of time to failure for the time of use and the sterilization cycles study groups. The ANOVA test revealed statistically significant differences between the number of cycles to failure and the time of use of NiTi endodontic reciprocating files (\(p<0.001\)) (Figure 5). However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the number of cycles to failure and the number of sterilization cycles applied to NiTi endodontic reciprocating files (\(p=0.848\)) (Figure 5). The mean length of the fractured file tip did not show statistically significant differences between the number of cycles to failure and the time of use (\(p>0.05\)) and number of sterilization cycles (\(p>0.05\)) applied to the NiTi endodontic reciprocating files (Figure 5). The scale distribution parameter (\(\eta\)) of Weibull statistics showed statistically significant differences between the number of cycles to failure and the time of use of NiTi endodontic reciprocating files (\(p<0.001\)) (Table 4, Figure 6A); however, there were no statistically significant differences between the number of cycles to failure and the number of sterilization cycles applied to NiTi endodontic reciprocating files (\(p>0.05\)) (Table 4, Figure 6B). The shape distribution parameter (\(\beta\)) of Weibull statistics did not show statistically significant differences between the number of cycles to failure and the time of use (\(p>0.05\)) (Table 4, Figure 6A), nor the number of sterilization cycles applied to NiTi endodontic reciprocating files (\(p>0.05\)) (Table 4, Figure 6B). The mean and SD values for the number of cycles of in-and-out movement and the length of the fractured file tip (mm) of the study groups are displayed in Table 5 and Figure 7.