Objective: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the flexural strength, microhardness, surface roughness, and color stability of provisional materials made using 3D printing, CAD/CAM, and conventional techniques. Materials and Methods: A total of 168 samples were fabricated and divided into three groups. Group A: 3D-printed at build angles of 0°, 15°, and 45°, Group B: CAD/CAM milled at high and low speeds, and Group C: Conventional self-curing interim resin. All samples were tested for flexural strength, microhardness, surface roughness, and color stability. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and t-tests at a significance level of 0.05. Results: Statistical analysis revealed significant differences among groups (P ≤ 0.05). The 15° 3D-printed group showed the highest flexural strength (149.33 MPa), while the CAD/CAM low-speed group had the lowest (95.83 MPa). The conventional resin showed the highest microhardness (23.7), whereas the 3D-printed 45° had the lowest (11.61). 3D-printed 15° exhibited the highest surface roughness (6.45 μm), while 3D-printed 0° and conventional had smoother surface mean values (0.412, 0.656 μm, respectively). CAD/CAM low-speed demonstrated the best color stability (ΔE = 1.18), while 3D-printed 45° showed the highest discoloration (ΔE = 7.42). Conclusion: Fabrication method significantly affects the properties of provisional restorations. While 3D printing offers high strength, it compromises hardness, smoothness, and color stability. Conventional and CAD/CAM methods provide a better balance in clinical performance. Clinical Significance: The method used to fabricate provisional restorations significantly influences their mechanical and esthetic properties, which directly affects their clinical performance, durability, and patient satisfaction. 3D Printing (especially at a 15° build angle) yields high flexural strength, making it suitable for load-bearing areas or cases requiring strong interim restorations. However, it has lower microhardness, rougher surfaces, and poorer color stability, which may lead to faster wear, plaque accumulation, and esthetic deterioration over time. Conventional self-curing resins offer higher hardness and smoother surfaces, which are beneficial for wear resistance and patient comfort, but may lack the strength of digitally fabricated options. CAD/CAM materials, particularly those milled at low speeds, exhibit excellent color stability, making them ideal for visible anterior regions where esthetics are critical. However, their lower flexural strength could be a limitation in certain clinical situations.
Qasim et al. (Tue,) studied this question.