## 3 Results  
Parametric tests were deemed appropriate for comparisons, as the Shapiro-Wilk values of measurements in each subgroup for every methodology indicated a normal distribution within the range of (\(\pm 1.5\)) when n < 50. According to the surface microhardness values, there is a statistically significant difference among groups in terms of the upper and lower surfaces, and differences in upper-lower variations (\(p<0.001\)). Compared to the control group, all experimental groups, excluding the etifert group (37.12 \(\pm\) 4.20), demonstrated an increase in surface microhardness values. This increase was statistically significant only in the group with added zinc borate (\(p<0.001\)). Looking at the lower surfaces, the values in the experimental groups were found to be lower than those in the control group, and this difference was statistically significant (\(p<0.001\)). The lowest microhardness value on the lower surface was obtained in the eticl-ceramic added group (17.01 \(\pm\) 5.75), while the highest value was observed in the group with added boric acid (36.95 \(\pm\) 6.85). When considering the difference between the upper and lower surfaces, the smallest difference was observed in the control group. The highest difference was identified in the experimental group with eticl-ceramic (28.81 \(\pm\) 6.96) (\(p<0.001\)). Except for boric acid, all other groups showed a statistically significant difference compared to the control group (\(p<0.001\)). All surface microhardness values are presented in Table 2. Furthermore, the figures of surface microhardness for all groups are presented in Figures 1-6. Figure 1: Control (without the addition of any boron material). Figure 2: The group with the addition of zinc borate. Figure 4: The group with the addition of etifert. Figure 5: The group with the addition of eticol-ceramic. Figure 6: The group with the addition of boric acid. Statistically significant differences were observed among all groups based on roughness values (_p_ < 0.001) (Table 3). Except for the eicol-ceramic group (0.53 \(\pm\) 0.35), Ra values were found to be higher in the experimental groups with the added boron compared to the control group. Although the Ra value in the eicol-ceramic group was lower than that of the control group, no significant difference was observed between them (_p_ > 0.05). The highest roughness value was encountered in the boric acid group (1.40 \(\pm\) 1.25). All roughness values are presented in Table 3.  
According to the \(\Delta\)E values in the experimental groups, the most significant color change occurred in the experimental group with eicol-ceramic, and this difference was statistically significant compared to the other groups (18.58 \(\pm\) 2.02). The \(\Delta\)E values in the other four experimental groups did not show statistically significant differences (_p_ > 0.05) (Table 4). The results of the inter-measurement correlation analysis across all groups are presented in Table 5. Correlation coefficients indicating a significant relationship between measurements were identified. According to the obtained results, surface roughness values exhibited negative correlations with color stability and surface microhardness values for all groups, respectively (_p_ = 0.038; r = \(-0.185/p\) = 0.006; r = \(-0.245\)). However, it was also observed that color stability showed a negative correlation with lower microhardness values (_p_ < 0.001; r = \(-0.557\)).