Restorations made of a combination of resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and composite resin (CR)--open sandwich fillings--have been recommended for use in proximal boxes of molar cavities. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical behaviour over time of RMGIC/CR sandwich restorations versus CR restorations in Class II molar cavities. During a period of 2 years, a total of 220 restorations were placed in 118 patients by one operator (VV). A random block allocation was used to allocate cavities to one of the two restorative techniques. Bitewing radiographs and photographs were taken at baseline and at annual recall appointments. At present, a total of 210 restorations have been evaluated after 1 year and 141 restorations after 2 years. All restorations were evaluated using a modification of USPHS criteria. A total of three RMGIC/CR and two CR restorations (2.8%) were rated as failures caused by endodontic complications or major fractures. Twenty-eight teeth were reported to have postoperative sensitivity at the baseline evaluation 1 week following placement. Nine RMGIC/CR (8.5%) and four CR (4.9%) restorations with minor fractures were rated Charlie but were still acceptable. Bitewing radiographs revealed progression of carious lesions in proximal surfaces of originally intact or restored teeth adjacent to five (5.9%). RMGIC/CR restorations and eight (10.9%) CR restorations. No statistically significant differences between the two types of restoration were observed with respect to marginal adaptation, discoloration and caries progression. However, a higher number of large CR filling exhibited postoperative sensitivity at baseline compared to moderate CR or extensive and moderate RMGIC/CR restorations.