Purpose: The aim of this study is to evaluate the satisfaction of patients rehabilitated with an immediate loading full-arch prosthesis (Columbus Bridge Protocol, CBP) and the potential changes made in their quality of life due to this treatment. Materials and methods: Between January and September 2012 we studied 7 patients in need of a full-arch immediate loading rehabilitation of one or both dental arches. Each patient answered a 26-questions questionnaire at a pre-surgical appointment (T0), 1 week after surgery (T1) and 2 months (T2) after surgery. A single dentist realized all the interviews, which lasted in average 15 minutes each. The questionnaires realized were inspired by statement of Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP). The questions were related to: pain, chewing ability, phonetics, aesthetics, home hygiene procedures, patient satisfaction. For categorical variables differences in the scores at the 3 time points were assessed by Cochran's test. If a statistically significant difference was found, post-hoc pair wise comparisons were performed by McNemar test. For multinomial data differences in the scores were evaluated with Marginal Homogeneity test, comparing each pair individually. A p ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant and a Bonferroni-corrected p-value of 0.017 was considered statistically significant for paired comparisons. Results: A total of 7 cases were assessed and only questions common to all questionnaires were considered for statistical analysis. No statistically significant difference between the 3 time points was noticed for variables regarding pain during chewing, smoking, phonetic difficulty, tense, avoiding smiling, difficulty in relating to others, instruments used for oral hygiene and difficulties to use them. A statistically significant difference between t0 and t2 was observed for the variables regarding satisfaction as regards ability to chew (p=0.023), and between t0 and t1 about satisfaction with the aesthetic appearance of teeth (p=0.041) with better values at t2 and t1 respectively. Conclusions: On the base of this prelimininary evaluation, patients treated with CBP reported a better chewing ability and a greater satisfaction with their esthetic appearance compared to pre-treatment assessments. All the patients were pleased with support and information received by the clinicians and they felt that CBP was an effective therapy for their oral problems. However further investigation on a larger number of patients is needed to confirm these results. Schlagwörter: implant supported prosthesis, edentulous jaw, oral health, patient satisfaction, treatment outcome