The absolute horror for any pet owner is to discover their beloved pet has escaped and is now lost. Although so many technologies exist to help re-unite owners and lost pets are out there, the most popular format is a microchip. But many studies are starting to show that there are considerable failures when it comes to the accuracy of a microchipped pet being re-united. 

According to the Humane Society of America, only 5% of lost cats and 30% of lost dogs are returned to their proper homes. But if they are microchipped, the odds increase to 52% for dogs, and 39% for cats. According to a presentation given by Dr. Julie Meadows at the latest North American Veterinary Conference, microchips can certainly help reunite pets with owners — but they’re not perfect.

To understand the issues concerning microchips, it helps to know a little bit about how they work. Microchips are tiny electronic devices that are injected under the skin with a hypodermic needle. When a scanner is passed over a pet's skin, it emits radiofrequencies that activate the chip, which transmits a unique identification number back to the scanner. The number is then compared against a database to locate the animal's owner.

For an effective microchip system, all three parts have to work: The microchip needs to be in the right location and functioning, the scanner must be able to detect the chip, and the database that links the chip number to the owner needs to be accurate. Microchips can also be missed due to an improper scanning technique, matted hair, excess body fat and a collar with a lot of metal that sits close to the microchip.

When microchips were first introduced in the United States in the 1990s, most chips were read with scanners that used 125-kiloHertz (kHz) or 128-kHz frequencies. In many cases, microchips from one company could not be read by a scanner from another company. Meanwhile, the rest of the world used scanners with a 134.2-kHz frequency. Since those scanners could not read American microchips, it presented an added problem for pets who were traveling internationally.

To comply with the International Standard Organization (ISO) global standard for microchips, some American companies began making microchips that used 134.2-kHz frequencies. Today, more and more companies are moving toward that standard.

However, according to a 2007 government report, 98 percent of microchipped pets in the U.S. had 125-kHz chips — and only 80 percent of scanners could read that frequency. As a result, a shelter using a 125-kHz scanner euthanized a dog that had a 134.2-kHz microchip because the scanner couldn't detect the chip.

These differences in microchip frequencies have led to several lawsuits. But the good news is that, in recent years, universal scanners that can read all frequencies have been introduced. So as more clinics and shelters adopt these universal scanners, it should reduce the risk of a microchip going undetected. Since the microchip only transmits a number, it’s also important to have an accurate database with owner information linked to that number. This is often easier said than done: One study showed that when shelters found microchips in animals, only 58 percent of them were registered. So even though they had a microchip, the owners neglected to submit contact information. Shelters also report that the major reason they're unable to locate an owner is because of incorrect information in the database.

So the major faults of the entire system are:

1) Microchips only result in ONLY 58% of microchipped dogs being returned to the owner

2) The largest manufacturer and biggest microchip company AVID makes encrypted chips that can only be read by THEIR SCANNERS ONLY. So to read an AVID 125mhz chip, you have to have an AVID scanner. Additionally, the AVID scanner does not read 128mhz or world standard 134mhz chips. 

3) Universal scanners ( reads 125, 128, and 134mhz chips) have started to appear in the market, but are not yet widely adopted. But even though they can read multiple chips, they still cannot read the chips of the largest manufacturer in the USA. 

4) A study ok'd by the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association was conducted on over 4000 shelter pets to determine accuracy of the microchips and readers. An interesting discovery was found that showed for each 5 pounds of weight, the ability of a scanner to detect a microchip decreased by 5%. So larger and fatter dogs were harder to scan and detect their chips that a smaller dog. 

5) Complicating matters is there is no US Government standard for a set frequency in North America. Politics, lobbying, and outright refusal to change technology was fought by AVID and Schering-Plough ( two of the heavyweights in the market and biggest players). Efforts started since 2009 have netted ZERO results in applying a standard.

6) Each company manufacturing microchips and scanners can detect their own chips accurately, but have mixed or limited results in scanning other companies' products. 

7) Upon being microchipped, an owner has to enter the registration and personal information into the database of the manufacturer. There are currently 6 major databases and none exchange information with the other. Additionally, the information has to be INPUT and UPDATED by the owner upon change of address, email, phone number. One veterinary organization has concluded that dogs which are rescued and microchipped, the chip scan detected the chip but the search of the registry databases came up with no information attached to it. A microchip only carries an ID number that has to be researched. These dogs were either euthanized or put up for adoption.

So now the information presents ONE HUGE QUESTION: What can be done?