{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030453257790368272, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021954674220963172, 'mean_word_length': 5.143478260869565, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Flexural Strength and Modulus of Elasticity of Two Base Materials. An In vitro Comparative study

Objective: To determine and compare flexural strength and modulus of elasticity of two base materials. Materials and Methods: 30 specimens made of the two materials (Activa Bioactive Base and Ionoseal GI Composite Cement) were divided into two groups; 15 specimens in each group, the materials were inserted at a single increment into prefabricated Teflon mold with dimensions of 12 mm x 2 mm x 2 mm placed on a glass plate according to manufacturer’s instructions. Flexural strength and modulus of elasticity were evaluated by a 3 point bending test by using an Instron universal testing machine (0.75mm/min & 0.03Hz for hundred cycles). Displacement, Flexural stress and Load were performed for all tests. Then all data were statistically evaluated and compared. Statistical data analysis was performed for flexural fatigue through the least frequent events method. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between mean flexural strength of Activa and Ionoseal (P-value = 0.248, Effect size = 0.679). Activa showed statistically significantly lower mean modulus of elasticity than IONA (P-value = 0.015, Effect size = 1.603). Conclusion: Activa Bioactive-enhanced RMGIs demonstrated comparable flexural strength to Ionoseal glass ionomer composite cement and showed lower modulus of elasticity.