Differences and similarities in diagnostic methods and treatments for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a scoping review

AimsWe investigate a range of studies related to COVID-19 with focus on scientific evidence reporting the main diagnosis and treatments of the disease. Main MethodsScoping review conducted in the databases, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, Scopus, and Web of Science, and the gray Google Scholar literature, until May 2020. We follow PRISMA-SCR and the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute. The identified studies were independently selected by peers. The qualitative data extracted were synthesized and organized into categories, and the quantitative data were generated through descriptive and inferential statistics. Key-findings6060 articles were identified, of which 30 were included in this review. The publications are predominantly from China (n=22, 73.3%), and with a type of cross-sectional study (n=12, 40.0%), followed by a cohort (n=7, 23.0%). Among them, 16 studies addressed the diagnosis, and computed tomography was considered as non-invasive complementary method for detecting and evaluating the progression of COVID-19. Laboratory tests have been used to detect enzymatic or viral activities, and to monitor the inflammation associated with COVID-19. 14 studies included different therapeutic associations, such as Lopinavir/Ritonavir (LPV/r) and Arbidol, Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, Tocilizumab and Remdesivir, and Corticosteroids/Plasminogen. SignificanceThe evidence related to diagnostic methods are clear, and include tomography and laboratory tests. Medicinal or associated medications for the treatment of COVID-19, although showing a reduction in signs and COVID-19-related symptoms, can cause adverse effects of mild or severe intensity depending on viral load and inflammatory activity. Additional studies should be performed to identify the most reliable treatment for COVID-19.