One of the major differences is the scanning tools involved, which also eliminates the need for redundant xrays, as the scanner is an oral device that scans the mouth digitally using a 3D scanner inserted in the mouth and passed along the gumline and on all sides of the teeth.

What redundant X-rays?

The person I replied to said they needed xray(s) to get their replacement tooth made, and worded their reply to imply that Norway has had this tech for some time, implying or assuming that the tech in Norway they experienced is the same as what I described. It is not the same in this key way: the system I described doesn’t use or require xrays, surely not additional ones over and above the ones many dentists already do with new patients.

Xrays are potentially harmful and exposure to them should be limited to those medically necessary. The system I described does not require “extra“ xrays or any additional xrays at all, thus my characterization of any xrays the person I replied to received as redundant compared to the treatment plan I was describing.

Is that clear? Hard to assume what the person in Norway got from their care but they didn’t get the same thing I described.

Edit: I see now you’re the same person I was replying to; I don’t mean to be pendantic, but the absence of xrays in the workflow I described is kind of a big difference, as what I described uses visual 3D scanning with an orally-inserted imaging device with no need for more xrays if the dentist doesn’t otherwise need them.

The X-ray was nothing to do with the crown it was simply the normal X-ray taken to check the condition of my teeth and it was that together with visual inspection that made my dentist decide that a crown was necessary. The rest of the process was essentially as you described except that it took place immediately after diagnosis. I just had to wait a few minutes for it to be completed the order did not have to be sent to a separate organization merely to a machine in another room.