OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS

Table No.1: Distribution of samples and groups under study:

Treatment No. of samples

Group 1 CPP-ACP (mousse) 15
Group 2 CPP-ACP + Fl (Mousse plus) 15
Group 3 Novamin 15
Group 4 Novamin+Fl 15

20

18

16
15 15 15 15
14
No. of samples

12

10

0
Group 1 (CPP-ACP Group 2(CPP-ACP+FL) Group 3(NOVAMIN)) Group 4(Novamin+F1)
(mousse)
 Table No.2: Mean and SD values of percentage occlusion in all four
groups under study:

Treatment Mean ± SD
Group 1 (n=15) CPP-ACP (mousse) 55.02 ± 10.59
Group 2 (n=15) CPP-ACP + Fl (Mousse plus) 87.85 ± 7.63
Group 3 (n=15) Novamin 99.14 ± 0.06
Group 4 (n=15) Novamin+Fl 99.17 ± 0.08

120

99.14 99.17
100
87.85

80
MEAN VALUES

55.02
60

40

20

0
GROUP 1 (CPP-ACP GROUP 2(cpp- GROUP 2(Novamin) GROUP 4(NOVAMIN
(mousse)) acp+F1(mouse plus) ) +F1) )
 Table No.3: Comparison of mean values of percentage occlusion in
Group 1 and Group 3:

Group 1 Group 2 ‘t’ test ‘p’ Significance

(n=15) (n=15) value value

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
55.02 ± 10.59 99.14 ± 0.06 16.16 p<0.01 Highly significant

By applying Student’s Unpaired ‘t’ test there is a highly significant

difference between mean values of percentage occlusion in group 1 and
group 2 (i.e. p<0.01)

120
99.14
100
MEAN VALUES

80
55.02
60

40

20

0
GROUP 1 (CPP-ACP (mousse)) GROUP3(Novamin)
 Table No.4: Comparison of mean values of percentage occlusion in
Group 1 and Group 2:

Group 1 Group 3 ‘t’ test ‘p’ Significance

(n=15) (n=15) value value

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
55.02 ± 10.59 87.85 ± 7.63 9.74 p<0.01 Highly significant

By applying Student’s Unpaired ‘t’ test there is a highly significant

difference between mean values of percentage occlusion in group 1 and
group 3 (i.e. p<0.01)

100 87.85
90

80

55.02
MEAN VALUES

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
GROUP 1 (CPP-ACP (mousse)) GROUP 3 (cpp-acp + Fl (Mousse plus)

Table No.4: Comparison of mean values of percentage occlusion in

Group 1 and Group 4:
 Group 1 Group 4 ‘t’ test ‘p’ Significance

(n=15) (n=15) value value

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
55.02 ± 10.59 99.17 ± 0.08 16.17 p<0.01 Highly significant

By applying Student’s Unpaired ‘t’ test there is a highly significant

difference between mean values of percentage occlusion in group 1 and
group 4 (i.e. p<0.01)

120
99.17
100
MEAN VALUES

80
55.02
60

40

20

0
GROUP 1 GROUP 4(NOVAMIN+F1)

Table No.5: Comparison of mean values of percentage occlusion in

Group 2 and Group 3:

Group 2 Group 3 ‘t’ test ‘p’ Significance

(n=15) (n=15) value value

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
 99.14 ± 0.06 87.85 ± 7.63 5.73 p<0.01 Highly significant

By applying Student’s Unpaired ‘t’ test there is a highly significant

difference between mean values of percentage occlusion in group 2 and
group 3 (i.e. p<0.01)

120 99.14
87.85
100
MEAN VALUES

80

60

40

20

0
GROUP 2(Novamin) GROUP 3(cpp-acp+F1(mousse plus))

Table No.6: Comparison of mean values of percentage occlusion in

Group 3 and Group 4:

Group 2 Group 4 ‘t’ test ‘p’ Significance

(n=15) (n=15) value value

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
99.14 ± 0.06 99.17 ± 0.08 1.16 p>0.05 Not significant
By applying Student’s Unpaired ‘t’ test there is no significant difference
between mean values of percentage occlusion in group 2 and group 4 (i.e.
p>0.05)

120
99.14 99.17
100
MEAN VALUES

80

60

40

20

0
GROUP 2(Novamin) GROUP 4(Novamin+F1)

Table No. 7: Comparison of mean values of percentage occlusion in

Group 2 and Group 4:

Group 3 Group 4 ‘t’ test ‘p’ Significance

(n=15) value value
(n=15)
Mean ± SD Mean ± SD
87.85 ± 7.63 99.17 ± 0.08 5.75 p<0.01 Highly significant

By applying Student’s Unpaired ‘t’ test there is a highly significant

difference between mean values of percentage occlusion in group 3 and
group 4 (i.e. p<0.01)
 120
99.17
100 87.85
MEAN VALUES

80

60

40

20

0
GROUP 3(Sccp-acp+F1(mousse plus) GROUP 4(NOVAMIN+F1)

Table No.8: Coefficient of variation for consistency of the groups:

GROUP TREATMENTS MEAN SD COEFICIENT OF
S
VARIATION VALUE (%)
Group 1 CPP-ACP 55.02 10.59 19.25%
(mousse)
Group 2 CPP-ACP + Fl 87.85 7.63 8.68%
(Mousse plus)
Group 3 Novamin 99.14 0.06 0.06%
Group 4 Novamin+Fl 99.17 0.08 0.081%

From the above table by applying Coefficient of variation technique it is

seen that the coefficient of variation (CV) for group 3 (Novamin) is less
(0.06%) than Coefficient of variation (CV) of group 4 (Novamin+F1)
(0.081%) followed by group 2 (cpp-acp+F1(mousse plus)) (8.68%), and
group 1 (cpp-acp (mousse)) (19.25%), thus it is concluded that group 3
(Novamin) and group 4 (Novamin+F1) is more consistent (reliable) than
group 2 (cpp-acp+F1(mousse plus)) (8.68%), and group 1 (cpp-
acp+F1(mousse)

Thus, present study it is recommended that treatment Novamin and

Novamin +F1 is better than other treatment groups under study.