This study aimed to evaluate the clinical performance of three bulk-fill composites with a conventional composite of microhybride according to two different clinical evaluation criteria. 120 restorations were performed. A doctor restored the randomly selected 30 teeth with the selected 4 materials (GC Posterior-Group 1, Tetric Evo Ceram Bulk Fill-Group 2, Sonic Fill System-Group 3, and Filtek Bulk Fill-Group 4). Patients were called to the clinic for 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Using FDI and USPHS clinical evaluation criteria, Two physicians scored each restoration. For each criterion, intra-group and inter-group data were analyzed using the IBM SPSS Statistics Version 22 packet program. After one year of evaluation, Surface polish, color stability, and surface structure of Sonic Fill System and Filtek Bulk Fill composites were found when compared with baseline scores (p <0,05). The scores showed a significant difference from the baseline values (p <0.05) when the patients' views were evaluated for GC Posterior and Filtek Bulk Fill composites. Postoperative sensitivity decreased with time in all composite restorations (p <0.05). According to both FDI and USPHS criteria, all of the restorative materials showed satisfactory clinical performance. The sensitivity of marginal discoloration was found to be higher in FDI criteria than in USPHS criteria. Much more evaluations are necessary for the long-term clinical performances of bulk-fill composite materials.
